Inside Europe: Iberian Notes

Posted 14:29 by John

The Vanguardia has recently been publishing a lot of lefty America-bashing by international lefties; today they've got one by Robert Fisk, and they've printed a couple more of Fisk's screeds in the last week or so. It's the same-old same-old. Naomi Klein got a couple of chances, too. Now, I do not agree with anything these two people say. I think they're idiots. However, I do not think they are bad people, nor do I think they are dishonest.

I do not feel the same way about Gore Vidal, though. Gore Vidal is scum. Gore Vidal is what you scrape off the bottom of your shoes after a day walking the streets of Barcelona. Gore Vidal hates Jews with a passion. He is a bitchy, catty, gossipy old queen. If you want to be sickened by amorality, read Vidal's autobiography. He got interviewed by Clarín, the Argentinian paper, and the Vangua picked it up and reprinted it on Wednesday. Here are some excerpts.

About conspiracy theories. We're a country full of accidents. We keep assassinating public men and we never find out who did it. It doesn't seem like we care too much. Then people tell me, "Oh, you're a conspiracy theorist," and start laughing hysterically. There's another extraordinary thing that I pointed out recently on television. Look: the first Bush was with the Carlyle petroleum group; the second, with Harkins Oil; Vice-President Cheney, with Halliburton Oil; Gale Norton, the interior Secretary, is also connected to petroleum. Condoleeza Rice is related with Exxon and Texaco, and the boss of the Pentagon, Donald Rumsfeld, was Occidental Petroleum's man. While I was speaking, I saw they were already trying to minimize it. So I said, "I'm not going to say there's a conspiracy. I don't believe in conspiracies. But are you telling me that it is a coincidence that they're leading the US and that we're about to go to war for the oil in Iraq?"

First, we're not going to war for the oil in Iraq. I've already posted about why, as have a lot of other people, and I don't think I need to post it again. Second, it's not unusual that a group of several important people should all have worked in the petroleum industry. It's one of the most important industries of our time. A hundred years ago all politicians had ties with the railroads. Two centuries ago all politicians had ties either with the shipping industry or with plantation agriculture. Third, Vidal shows what a rat he is with his little sally saying that he's not calling it a conspiracy while implying it is. Vidal is accusing the leaders of the United States of conspiring for the benefit of the oil industry. He is saying that they are guilty of war crimes and corruption and abuse of power, since going to war to steal another country's resources is obviously not a just war. But they can't sue him for libel because he weaseled out of making a direct statement of what he is implying. Oh, and fourth, three important men have been assassinated in America since World War II. We know that Oswald killed John Kennedy, Ray killed Martin Luther King, and Sirhan killed Robert Kennedy. Vidal, of course, believes that all three murders were some kind of CIA-Pentagon-Mafia plot. What this means is that he believes that our elected government is a front for the mysterious men who really run things, and that those mysterious men are killers.

Remember: saying "No blood for oil" is saying that the United States, British, Spanish, Italian, Australian, and Eastern European governments are international war criminals. That's a very serious charge to make and I am disgusted that so many people are making it so lightly. But not surprised.

(On September 11) During an hour and a half they knew that the airliners that had taken off from Boston had been hijacked. The FAA followed them on the radar and saw that they were heading for Washington. The FAA has a law saying (my father was once the director and I believe he was the one who made this law) that in case of any kind of hijacking, the air force should intervene within four or five minutes. It didn't. This called my attention. I wouldn't go so far as to say that it was a conspiracy. A conspiracy of whom? Why didn't they intervene?

Vidal weasels out of calling it a conspiracy again while implying that there was one--a conspiracy to destroy the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the World Trade Center that resulted in 3000 deaths, presumably so we'll have an excuse to grab the oil. Vidal is accusing the Bush Administration of being a gang of mass murderers. That is an extraordinary claim and it requires extraordinary evidence, which Vidal does not provide.

Vidal goes on to accuse Bush of not having properly organized investigations into September 11, the Democratic leadership of behaving like sheep, the CIA of conspiring with the Pakistani secret services to funnel money to Mohammed Atta, the whole government of "suspending our civil rights", and the British of being Bush's lapdog for political and economic reasons.

I don't think Vidal is an agent of some kind of international conspiracy to defame America. I think he's just an asshole.

Posted 02:29 by John

Good stuff, as usual, is up at Ibidem. Chicago Boyz also has several good posts up, and these guys are no dummies. Craig Schamp has some Franco-Deutsch jokes that are pretty funny. Merde in France rocks. John Bono always has plenty of good stuff up. This guy is not a bad writer. Check out his archives. The People's Republic of Seabrook is a clever, well-written site. Eamonn from Rainy Day is an Irishman writing from Munich. Check his stuff out.

Posted 16:45 by John

Today's Vangua is reporting that Bush said that Saddam's overthrow will lead toward the possibility of "a viable Palestinian state". Bad, bad move, George, if what you mean is that a Palestinian state will be possible with the current leadership of the Palestinian Authority, also known as "that gang of criminals and murderers". Now, if we get rid of Saddam, that'll be one fewer source of money, shelter, training, and weapons for Arafat and his thugs, but it won't change the Arab-Israeli problem one bit. Maybe getting rid of Saddam will force the Saudis to give up funding all the terrorists they have been funding over the years, and that'll force a change in the Palestinian leadership. I dunno. We could speculate all day. But I think linking Gulf War II with the Palestinian problem is not a good idea at all.

The White House is also calculating that the war will cost us $95 billion and we're not likely to get the subsidies we got form the Japanese and Arabs last time. Yeah, right, we're doing it for the oil. Aznar met Chirac in Paris yesterday and the official announcement after the meeting said that the two countries disagreed, but in a friendly way. Tony Blair got hit by a backbench revolt from his own party; a motion of no confidence gained 199 votes out of 659. Almost all the Lib Dems, all the nationalists, a good few left-wing Laborites (rumor has it Gordon Brown is sharpening his knife, but I don't buy it, not over a national-security issue), and a few dumbass Tories like Kenneth Clarke. They're saying this looks bad for Tony. Wait till the war is over before we decide what looks good or bad. And, of course, the most important question is not what fickle public opinion thinks right now but about what history will say in a hundred years. Wanna bet the leaders of the capitalist democracies are more likely to be on the right side of history, especially when the opposition is Schröder, Saddam, Putin, Chirac, and whoever's running China? What a collection of mediocrities. Saddam will be remembered for possessing the evil of Hitler combined with the competence of Mussolini. Putin is no Havel. Schröder is no Adenauer. Chirac is, unfortunately, a Blum or a Daladier. Blair will be remembered as a slick politician who came up trumps when it counted, showing more backbone than anyone figured, a lot like Franklin D. Roosevelt. That's pretty good. I think Roosevelt is overrated, but he did show real backbone against the Axis and is justifiably celebrated for that, despite his other shortcomings.

Dan Rather interviewed Saddam, who didn't say anything we didn't figure he would say. Rather, however, failed to ask Mr. Hussein what the frequency was. He also addressed the Iraqi dictator as "Mr. President", rather than "Kenneth".

Aznar said that he "wouldn't trade security for votes". Well said, Mr. Aznar! Meanwhile, Aznar's popularity has dropped but he's still holding a two-point lead over the Socialists in "voting intention", and the PP always does two or three points better in the real election than the surveys say. This is as rock-bottom as Aznar's popularity is going to fall, since it will rise again after the war is won.

Spain is sending its aircraft carrier, the Principe de Asturias, which carries some 20 Harriers and helicopters, on combined maneuvers with the Italians in the Mediterranean. That gets it several hundred miles closer to the Syrian coast. The carrier is the jewel of the crown as far as the Spanish military goes. In addition, several other Spanish ships are going on antisubmarine maneuvers with those of other NATO countries in the Ionian Sea.

Barça went into Milan last night and came out with an 0-0 tie against Inter, breaking their streak of 11 consecutive victories in the Champions' League. Both teams played highly defensively during the whole game; Vieri was Inter's only forward, and he didn't do anything much. For the Barça, Cocu tore a ligament and will be out at least two months; he'll be replaced by some combination of Gabri, Gerard, and Luis Enrique. Gabri had a good game last night at right defenseman. Puyol, in the middle, got banged in the head going up for a high ball and had to be substituted, since his eye swelled up. He might miss next weekend's Spanish league game against Osasuna. Andersson played competently during the rest of the game. Good thing he's healthy again because they're going to need him; he's a solid defender who they signed from Bayern Munich a couple of years ago right after Bayern won the Champions'. He then got hurt instantly and hasn't played until now. Luis Enrique didn't play, I don't know why, because he's supposed to be healthy again. Riquelme got in the game late and did OK. Saviola didn't do much and Kluivert wandered around aimlessly as if he were a midfielder. Rochemback did OK as a defensive midfielder on the right side. Lots of defense. It was really pretty boring. Imagine an 0-0 hockey game, but with fewer fights.

Posted 13:15 by John

Here's a link to the CIA Factbook for Spain. I thought this was pretty interesting. It contains an extensive list of economic, political, and social data. From here, besides the Spain info, you can access, first, a listing of all countries' statistics on each particular datum--e.g. telephone lines per 1000 people or whatever--for purposes of comparison, by clicking on the second icon (not the open book, the other one) for each datum, and second, the same extensive report on any other country in particular. I suggest that people look up a couple of the Latin American countries and see how their data compare with, say, those of an Eastern European country, an Arab country, an East Asian country, and an African country. Just pick fairly standard countries--say, compare Peru and Hungary and Syria and Thailand and Ghana. See if you can make any generalizations from that. I don't know if I've succeeded. If I do, I'll let you know. I'm sure y'all are waiting with bated breath.

I thought this paragraph was interesting:

Spain and UK are discussing "total shared sovereignty" over Gibraltar, subject to a constitutional referendum by Gibraltarians, who have largely expressed opposition to any form of cession to Spain; Spain controls the coastal enclaves of Ceuta and Melilla, which Morocco contests, as well as the islands of Penon de Alhucemas, Penon de Velez de la Gomera, and Islas Chafarinas; Morocco rejected Spain's unilateral designation of a median line from the Canary Islands in 2002 to explore undersea resources and to interdict illegal refugees from Africa.

The emphasis is mine.

Other things I thought were interesting were: In 1997 Spain had 9000 kilometers of expressways. Now, Spain is a big country, the size of Texas, but when I first came here, in 1987, there wasn't a four-lane road all the way from Barcelona to Madrid, and the road from Córdoba to Granada was just barely two-lane. This is a major change; here's an important piece of infrastructure that's jumped from high-Third World level to real European level. Since they're still building expressways all over the country, I figure Spain has well over 12,000 km of them by now.

The countries with which Spain has the most international commerce are France, Geramany, and Italy, in order. The US provides 4.5% of Spanish imports and takes 4.4% of Spanish exports; I'd figured it would be more. Latin America provides only 2% of Spanish imports and takes only 4% of Spanish exports; I guess I shouldn't be surprised at the lack of imports from Latin America, because I don't think there are any but coffee--it's hard to find anything Latin American here. I thought Latin America was an important buyer of Spanish imports, though, but they're not.

Spanish electricity production is 57% from fossil fuels, 12% from hydro, 3% from "other sources", and 28% from nuclear plants. I thought hydro was much more important, and I'm surprised at how dependent Spain is on nuclear power. Agriculture provides only 4% of the Spanish GDP, which I find surprising, because of Spain's enormous fruit and vegetable production--it feeds half of Europe--and I'd thought that the traditional Spanish crops, wine grapes and olives, were lucrative crops per hectare. In addition, Spain has huge pork and poultry industries and a large dairy industry; it exports a lot of this stuff to the rest of Europe as well. I keep forgetting that Spain is now a major economic power, with the fifth largest economy in Europe.

By the way, today's Vanguardia is reporting that Aznar has said that he wants Spain to be a "First Division" country; there's a nice soccer metaphor. He's succeeded, as the Vangua publishes a photo of some demonstrators in Cairo holding up a sign that says: "New Axis of Evil=USA UK Italy Spain". Cool! Spain's important enough to get bashed by the Islamofascists! Seriously, I believe that Mr. Aznar is very much enjoying feeling himself a major world leader. Well, he is one now. The anti-PP Spanish press, which is most of it except ABC, has been publishing a flood of editorial cartoons trying to ridicule Aznar's world standing, showing Bush as the sheriff and Aznar as his subservient deputy. For some reason they're all using the same tired image. The truth is that Mr. Aznar has fairly won the esteem and high regard of the American and the British governments, and this cannot but be a good thing for Spain.

Posted 15:55 by John

I have a suggestion to make to other Eurobloggers (that is, other bloggers who write about Europe, wherever they live or come from). Let's put together a joint blog that would consist of column-length and -style pieces rather than the informal entries that we usually blog. I'd be willing to contribute a column a week, and if four other people (of course, the more the merrier) want to sign on, too, that'd give us a minimum of five quality pieces a week. People would pay attention, I think; at the very least all our regular readers would be interested and I'll bet we could attract a good few more as a group. Anyone interested?

Possible boring name: Euroblog. Possible more interesting name: Euro Sex Snack Blog. There used to be a dive called the Euro Sex Snack Bar on the Ramblas across the street from the Plaza Real. It was apparently a clip joint with strippers. Once this dumb German guy who was living in the same hostal I was (this was 1988 and he was kind of a dirtbag. He was evading his military service) went in there with no money and ordered like six double whiskeys and tried to leave without paying and they stripped him to his underwear and threw him out in the street. This same guy sneaked a hooker into his room and she stole whatever stuff he had left and the owner kicked him out. Anyway, I personally never went in the Euro Sex Snack Bar. Really. I've never even been in Barcelona's notorious Bagdad Club, where audience participation is encouraged in the stage show, if you know what I mean, and I'll bet you do. The story is they used to have a donkey that, uh, performed live on stage, until the Protectora de Animales showed up and took it away.

Posted 15:15 by John

The Vanguardia leads off today with the headline "Bush says another resolution 'unnecessary'." Bush made it clear that he wants another UN resolution to pass, but if it doesn't, he considers the US to be operating with UN permission anyway because of Resolution 1441 and the 16 previous UN resolutions censuring Saddam. Meanwhile, sources within the Spanish government said scornfully, "If France uses its veto, that'll be their last veto in history", since the UN will lose all authority if it is seen to be openly defied by the United States.

Aznar and Blair are sticking by Bush though it's going to cost them, short-term, in popularity. Big deal. After the war is won nearly bloodlessly and all of Saddam's atrocities are revealed--and they are going to shock the world--it will suddenly be a very popular war. Aznar and Blair and Berlusconi will look like strong leaders who took a stand. Chirac and Schröder will look like what they are: weasels. The Belgians will embarrasedly look to make some other international news, perhaps another bribery scandal involving the royal family or another ring of pederast murderers ignored by the police. The Spanish Left will claim that the anti-American demonstrations of the 15th were a glorious popular outcry against war in general rather than a tantrum thrown at the United States in general and the war on Saddam in particular.

The Vanguardia is making an extremely big deal out of the Vatican's--well, Angelo Sodano and Jean-Louis Tauran's--stand aginst the war on Iraq; Aznar is going to Rome tomorrow to see the Pope and the guys who do the actual work. (Note: I do not think these guys are manipulating the Pope. I see the Pope as someone like Reagan, someone who set the general tone of leadership, made the final decisions, and left the detail work to competent, well-chosen associates. Sodano and Tauran and Navarro Valls are certainly competent, and I'm sure they are following the Pope's general instructions.) I'll bet Aznar's visit does no good at all.

Jesús Gil from Ibidem had a good post a couple of days ago in which he warned about Catholic-bashing, which he is absolutely right to caution about, and pointed out that it's the Pope's responsibility to work toward peace. What's he supposed to do, cheerlead for a war?

I dunno. One thing is that the Church is not a pacifist organization and never has been. In fact, the Church has often justified war. (The Quakers, say, are really pacifists.) Therefore, it seems to me that the Pope is being unfair in his judgment. Right now there are ten or twenty wars, depending on how you count them, happening around the world. I haven't heard the Church speak out against any of them, and especially not about the French intervention in the Ivory Coast. I think, therefore, that the Vatican is being partial and the part it's taking is against the United States, since the only war that it is speaking out against is the war on Saddam--a war that is as justified as any in history, in my view. I also believe that this partiality is due to the Latin European cultural outlook of those who hold the important posts in the Church hierarchy.

Another thing I find very disturbing is the attitude among Catholic circles in Spain that there is a conspiracy against them in the United States. Their evidence is that there has been a "media campaign" about the wave of cases of child sexual abuse over the past couple of years in the United States. I personally believe that it's difficult to be much lower than a child-molester, and enough Catholic priests were child-molesters, lifelong pedophiles who behaved upon their urges, that this is a sign of a serious problem within the Church that has to be dealt with openly and honestly. The current Pope is unwilling to deal with the problem. But this is not the worst part about what happened; the worst part is that certain elements within the American Church, bishops and cardinals, knew there was a problem with child-molesting priests and covered it up. This is about as evil as it gets, protecting men who abuse their positions of trust and authority to exploit children sexually. The Church has lost a great deal of moral authority in my eyes, and I will continue to find it wanting until I see a real change. I haven't seen that change. I imagine it will take a new Pope to make a clean break with the past.

The Church needs to greatly modernize itself. Its hierarchy needs to be completely democratized and to become transparent. It needs to do a much better job vetting its priests. It also needs to get rid of the "only single men in the priesthood" rule. It's unnatural to expect people to be celibate all their lives. Most normal people, gay or straight, are thereby excluded from the Church hierarchy; many young Catholics who feel a religious call go over to the Episcopalians or Lutherans instead, where they can work as ministers and live like normal people at the same time. What this means is that there is a sizeable percentage of weirdos among priests. (Personal experience: I've known three Catholic priests. One is a great guy who I went to high school with. He's a real Christian and I admire that. He practices what he preaches. We had a running gag in senior-year American government class: I'd make a comment and end my reasoning with "Because, of course, there is no God." This guy Bill would imitate a lightning flash striking me dead and intone in a deep voice, "You could be wrong." Maybe you had to be there. Cracked up the class, though. One, here in Spain, is a weirdo but not a perv. He is a drunk. I know this because back when I was a drunk I used to drink beer with him. And a third, who lived in the same college dorm as I did, is a major weirdo. He's a perv, all right. I wouldn't turn my kids loose around him if I had kids. I really would not.)

And, by the way, it's simply ridiculous to say that women can't be priests. That attitude is simply not acceptable to the general American or European public any more. In addition, the no-birth-control rule is just plain ridiculous too and a cause of unnecessary deaths from sexually transmitted diseases. Seems to me they could at least legalize barrier methods for reasons of disease prevention. I'll bet all you Catholics have heard this many times before and don't much appreciate us outsiders giving unsolicited advice, but you know the Church is in trouble and needs a major shakeup. There have been major shakeups before; allowing condoms, women priests, and married priests wouldn't be as big a change as those made during Vatican II, and taking these steps would remove a lot of the opposition to and criticism of the Church. And they'd regain the moral authority they used to have, because right now, the fact that the Church opposes the war means about two cents to me. A democratic, modernized, transparent Church--I'd think twice about what they have to say. The Church as it is currently operating--nope.

Here's a little pearl from right-wing Catholic Enric Juliana in today's Vangua: "Catholicism will have to have a showdown with the evangelical fundamentalism of the ruling group in Washington". That is not a very responsible attitude at all, and it is not unusual among Spanish Catholics. Enric Juliana is the guy who keeps complaining about the "moral lynching" of the Church over the pederasty scandals in America. He's one of the elements that just doesn't get it yet. By the way, Bush is a Methodist. Some evangelical fundamentalism. The United Methodist Church is against the war. The only evangelical, as far as I know, who is important in the government is John Ashcroft. He's pretty far right and is too extreme for me. I would not vote for him in an election if the Democrats put up a reasonable candidate. But Ashcroft is not the neo-Nazi that he is often portrayed as. His fundamentalism is non-violent. It's misleading to call both Ashcroft and other American fundies the same thing we call Islamic Jihad and al Qaeda and the Wahabis, because they are two different kinds of fundamentalism.

The Generalitat took a survey about the values of Catalans and especially Catalan young people (ages 18-29) in 2000 and have just gotten around to publicizing it. Only 5.7% of Catalan young people consider themselves to be practicing Catholics. 58.2% consider themselves "nonpracticing" Catholics. The rest, I suppose, are agnostics, atheists, or don't know, don't cares. If this isn't an alarm bell for the Church, I don't know what would be. And check out this table of "basic values"; the percentages are, first, young people who say these things are basic values, and second, all adults.

Value Young people Adults
Family 99% 99%
Friends 97% 88%
Free time 92% 79%
Work 85% 88%
Politics 15% 20%
Religion 10% 33%

This should be another alarm bell. And here comes wake-up call number three: the degree of confidence in the social system. These percentages are of the number of people who trust different influential institutions.

Institution Young people Adults
Educational system 58% 63%
Health care 58% 62%
Catalan parliament 55% 62%
Catalan police 54% 61%
European Union 46% 45%
Spanish police 46% 58%
Spanish parliament 46% 53%
Public administration 41% 41%
UN 41% 36%
Press 40% 40%
NATO 38% 31%
Judicial system 36% 42%
Armed forces 21% 37%
Church 18% 31%

My responses would have been that I trust all of these Spanish institutions to be acting basically honestly and with the public good in mind except for the press and the judicial system, but I only trust the health system, the Spanish Parliament, both police forces, and NATO to act generally competently.

Posted 12:48 by John

An excellent source of news from Spain, in Spanish, is the online daily newspaper Libertad Digital. It's out of Madrid and has a moderate-conservative leaning. Among its well-known writers are Federico Jiménez Losantos, Amando de Miguel, Carlos Rodríguez Braun, Carlos Alberto Montaner (one of the authors of the Complete Latin American Idiot), Jorge Alcalde, and Andrés Freire. This is a legit, very professionally done site and I should start paying a lot more attention to it. Another source of information that I am going to pay a lot more attention to is the World Press Review Online, which is a wonderful selection of news stories from all around the world, not only America, Spain, and Germany, but also Botswana, Bangladesh, and Bolivia. Fascinating stuff. If you, for some reason, have never been there, you ought to check it out.

Posted 18:10 by John

Just a trip through a few blogs this afternoon...Amiland has all kinds of good stuff up from Germany. Belligerent Bunny Blog has an updated list of national GDPs per capita, which is very interesting, among bunny photos and weapons info. Cinderella Bloggerfeller has a lot of very erudite stuff--this guy is the best-read blogger there is out there and has a sharp wit as well. Just one thing--change your name, please! The Dissident Frogman has an excellent banner up, as well as commentary from behind the Escargot Curtain. Sasha Castel and Andrew Ian Dodge have gotten married. Opposites must have attracted in this whirlwind courtship, the first blog-marriage I have ever heard of, since operatic Sasha and heavy-metal Andrew seem to have hit it off quite well. Sasha, Sasha, if you had wanted the brilliant and sculpted Jedman, I could have got him for you! Oh, well, your loss. Poor old Jedman does need a girlfriend, though. Hope you females out there think bald guys are cute. Leave flirtatious comments for him here and I'll make sure he gets them. He's actually not a bad-looking guy, in sort of a goofy kind of way.

This crap does actually happen. I've been treated to it more than once in Spain, though never in France or Britain. Most Europeans are basically decent people, and most people in Spain are very nice though they may have political ideas that you would find inane. But it does happen occasionally. Last time it happened to me was about a year ago when a waitress at a neighborhood restaurant started giving me shit after I sent back a salad because it had salsa rosa on it, and I hate salsa rosa. Salsa rosa sucks. It's just mustard and ketchup mixed with a little brandy dumped in. I can't believe people think it's good here. Why would you put that shit on a salad in Spain, the home of extra virgin olive oil and red wine vinegar? Catalonia's arbequino olives, which come from Remei's area, make terrific olive oil that you can get here for three bucks a liter or so. You can even get varietal vinegars for only a couple of bucks for a liter bottle. They're good. Anyway, the report below is via The Radical.

Monday, February 24, 2003
No Americans Served Here: Rob Nichols, the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs for the US Treasury, was on the Eurostar train from London to Paris when he changed his mind about his breakfast order. Nichol's server first mocked the American's indecision and then refused to provide him with cutlery, stating "Give peace a chance." Nichols was obliged to borrow the Secretary of the Treasury's cutlery. When asked whether Eurostar had extended an apology for its employee's behavior, Nichols replied that no apology had been sought.

Posted 13:46 by John

There's a fascinating book that's only available in Spanish, as far as I know. It's called the Manual of the Complete Latin American...and Spanish...Idiot and it's by three Latin American liberal journalists and writers named Plinio Apuleyo Mendoza, who is Colombian, Carlos Alberto Montaner, who's Cuban, and Álvaro Vargas Llosa, who is Peruvian. One of their chapters is titled "Ten Books that Latin American Idiots Love". (They are by no means calling all Latin Americans and Spaniards idiots, just those that still believe in, like, Socialism and stuff.) This comes up because one Régis Débray wrote a nasty op-ed in the New York Times a couple of days ago in which he said all kinds of nasty stuff about the United States. None of it looked too shocking to me, since I'm used to these Porcel-Solé-Haro Tecglen-Vázquez Montalbán Yankee-bashing frenzies that I have so faithfully informed y'all of. Andrew Sullivan and James Taranto sure thought that Débray's rant was out of line, though, and they took him to task for his revolutionary past; James Lileks took the fiskbroom to him.

Well, Régis Débray wrote a book called Revolution within the Revolution? in 1967, and it is one of the ten best-loved books of the Idiot Left according to Mendoza, Montaner, and Vargas Llosa. Here's their take on it, and him.

In the decade of the sixties, Régis Débray--born in Paris in 1941--was a young French journalist, with a degree in sociology, incredibly mature for his age, seduced by Marxist ideas, and--even more--by the Cuban revolution and the photogenic spectacle of a paradisiac Caribbean island governed by audacious bearded men who were preparing the final assault on the imperialist American fortress.

With good prose and a crazy young head predisposed toward sharp analysis, he was received in Havana with open arms. Cuba was a petri dish of men of action, but there was not an abundance of theoreticians capable of giving meaning to the facts or, simply, thinkers competent enough to justify them reasonably well. Che, for example, had published his famous manual "Guerrilla Warfare" and was preparing to put it in practice on the South American stage, but the battle he was on the point of launching left a dangerous flank open: what was the place of the Communist parties and the traditional Marxist-Leninist organizations? Besides, from a theoretical perspective it was necessary to explain the rupture with the old script written by Marx in the 19th century and finished by Lenin in the 20th. Hadn't we agreed that Communism would come as a consequence of the class struggle, egged on by the revolutionary vanguard of the working class organized by the Communist Party?

This is what Revolution within the Revolution? deals with, not as an abstract intellectual exercise, but as an extremely important revolutionary task, absolutely deliberated, which reveals itself with total candidness in a paragraph which says the following: "When Che Guevara reappears (he had "gotten lost" to prepare the uprising in Bolivia), it would not be too adventurous to affirm that he will be at the front of a guerilla movement as the unchallenged political and military leader". Débray, simply, was one more guerrilla soldier, although his mission was not to ambush enemies but to justify actions, rationalize heresies, write in the newspapers, spread revolutionary theses, and open up a space for the comrades in the First World. He was, in the old language of the Cold War, a fellow traveler, totally consciously, and proud of his work.

He'd had some practice. In 1964, under the pseudonym Francisco Vargas, he published in Paris, in the magazine Révolution, a long article ("A Guerrilla Experience") in which he described his visit to the Venezuelan subversives who were then trying to destroy the incipient democracy resurging in the country since the overthrow of Pérez Jiménez (1958). It was this long text which won him the confidence of Castro, the intellectual author and material accomplice of the Venezuelan guerrillas, to whom he sent not only weapons and money, but even his best-loved disciple: Captain Arnaldo Ochoa, shot by a firing squad many years later in 1989, with the rank of general, after ceasing to be sufficiently loyal to him.

In any case, if Che was about to begin his great (and last) adventure, and if this action would provoke the wrath, the rejection, or the indifference of the local Communist parties, dependent upon Moscow, they had to get ahead of the action with a sort of grammar-book of the Cuban revolution: Revolution within the Revolution? The little Frenchie said three fundamental things for the happiness and benefit of Havana as well as for the greater glory of Che: in the first he advised that revolutions in Latin America must emerge from a rural military base which, in its moment, will give birth to a political vanguard. This thesis is referred to as "focusism". In the second he affirms that, when the order of factors is inverted--creating the political vanguard first and then trying to create the "focus" of insurrection--the political organization becomes an end in itself and never manages to forge an armed struggle. With the third, he signals the enemy to be defeated: Yankee imperialism and its local henchmen.

This gibberish--a true conceptual amplification of Guevara's manual--didn't do him much good. A patrol of badly armed Indians shot down the pompous theory of "focusism". Débray was captured by the Bolivian Army after a visit to the guerrillas organized by Guevara and was tried for armed rebellion, despite his protests of innocence based on his journalistic alibi. He admitted, nonetheless, having kept watch a few nights, denied ever having fired at anyone, and asked for the procedural guarantees which he certainly never defended for his hated bourgeois enemies. Fortunately, his captors didn't mistreat him beyond slapping him around a few times, and due to international pressure, after a few months he was released despite the long sentence that he had been given. After his return to Paris he underwent a slow, gradual evolution and, much to his regret, became profoundly hated and held in contempt by his Cuban friends. Débray had learned that within the revolution there was not another revolution, but an immense and bloody lie that led to the deaths of thousands of dreamy adolescents in love with political violence.

By the way, the authors' list of the Ten Books Loved by Idiots consists of:

10. History Will Absolve Me, Fidel Castro, 1953.
9. The Damned of the Earth, Frantz Fanon, 1961.
8. Guerrilla Warfare, Che Guevara, 1960.
7. Revolution..., Débray, 1967.
6. The Elemental Concepts of Historical Materialism, Marta Harnecker, 1969.
5. The One-Dimensional Man, Herbert Marcuse, 1964.
4. How To Read Donald Duck, Ariel Dorfman and Armand Mattelart, 1972.
3. Dependence and Development in Latin America, F.H. Cardoso and Enzo Faletto, 1969.
2. Toward a Liberation Theology, Gustavo Gutiérrez, 1971.
1. The Open Veins of Latin America, Eduardo Galeano, 1971. The authors call this "The Idiot's Bible" and devote a whole chapter to fisking some of its most ridiculous assertions.

Posted 19:10 by John

I was looking around in the Internet Public Library when I found this little 1830s manual titled The Young Man's Guide by Wm. A. Alcott. Mr. Alcott warns young men luridly about the dangers of going to the theater and playing cards and the like, and he points out that spitting on the street is "common", but he reserves his heavy artillery for, you guessed it...

Neither resort to solitary vice. If this practice should not injure your system immediately, it will in the end. I am sorry to be obliged to advert to this subject; but I know there is occasion. Youth, especially those who lead a confined life, seek occasional excitement. Such sometimes resort to this lowest, -- I may say most destructive of practices. Such is the constitution of things, as the Author of Nature has established it, that if every other vicious act were to escape its merited punishment in this world, the one in question could not. Whatever its votaries may think, it never fails, in a single instance, to inure them, personally; and consequently their posterity, should any succeed them.
It is not indeed true that the foregoing vices do of themselvees, produce all this mischief directly; but as Dr. Paley has well said, criminal intercourse 'corrupts and depraves the mind more than any single vice whatsoever.' It gradually benumbs the conscience, and leads on, step by step, to those blacker vices at which the youth once would have shuddered.
But debasing as this vice is, it is scarcely more so than solitary gratification. The former is not always at hand; is attended, it may be, with expense; and with more or less danger of exposure. But the latter is practicable whenever temptation or rather imagination solicits, and appears to the morbid eye of sense, to be attended with not hazard. Alas! what a sad mistake is made here! It is a fact well established by medical men, that every error on this point is injurious; and that the constitution is often more surely or more effectively impaired by causes which do not appear to injure it in the least, than by occasional and heavier shocks, which rouse it to a reaction. The one case may be compared to daily tippling, the other to those periodical drunken follies, which, having an interval of weeks or months between them, give the system time to recover, in part, (but in part only) from the violence it had sustained.
I wish to put the younger portion of my readers upon their guard against a set of wretches who take pains to initiate youth, while yet almost children, into the practice of the vice to which I have here adverted. Domestics -- where the young are too familiar with them -- have been known to be thus ungrateful to their employers. There are, however, people of several classes, who do not hesitate to mislead, in this manner.
But the misfortune is, that this book will not be apt to fall into the hands of those to whom these remarks apply, till the ruinous habit is already formed. And then it is that counsel sometimes comes too late. Should these pages meet the eye of any who have been misled, let them remember that they have begun a career which multitudes repent bitterly; and from which few are apt to return. But there have been instances of reform; therefore none ought to despair. 'What man has done, man may do.'
They should first set before their minds the nature of the practice, and the evils to which it exposes. But here comes the difficulty. What are its legitimate evils? They know indeed that the written laws of God condemn it; but the punishment which those laws threaten, appears to be remote and uncertain. Or if not, they are apt to regard it as the punishment of excess, merely. They, prudent souls, would not, for the world, plunge into excess. Besides, 'they injure none but themselves.' they tell us.
Would it were true that they injured none but themselves! Would there wer not generations yet unborn to suffer by inheriting feeble constitutions, or actual disease, from their progenitors!
Suppose, however, they really injured nobody by themselves. Have they a right to do even this? They will not maintain, for one moment, that they have a right to take away their own life. But what right, then, to they allow themselves to shorten it, or diminish its happiness while it lasts?
Here the questions recurs again: Does solitary gratification actually shorten life, or diminish its happiness?
The very fact that the laws of God forbid it, is an affirmative answer to this question. For nothing is more obvious than that all other vices which that law condemns, stand in the way of our present happiness, as well as the happines of futurity. Is this alone an exception to the general rule?
But I need not make my appeal to this kind of authority. You rely on human testimony. You believe a thousand things which yourselves never saw or heard. Why do you believe them, except upon testimony -- I mean given either verbally, or, what is the same thing, in books?
Now if the accumulated testimony of medical writers from the days of Galen, and Celsus, and Hippocrates, to the present hour, could have any weight with you, it would settle the point at once. I have collected, briefly, the results of medical testimony on this subject, in the next chapter; but if you will take my statements for the present, I will assure you that I have before me documents enough to fill half a volume like this, form those who have studied deeply these subjects, whose united language is, that the practice in question, indulged in any degree, is destructive to body and mind; and that although in vigorous young men, no striking evil may for some time appear, yet the punishment can no more be evaded, except by early death, than the motion of the arth can be hindered. And all this, too, without taking into consideration the terrors of judgments to come.
But why, then, some may ask, are animal propensities given us, if they are not to be indulged? The appropriate reply is, they are to be indulged; but it is only in accordance with the laws of God; never otherwise. And the wisdom of these laws, did they not rest on other and better proof, is amply confirmed by that great body of medical experience already mentioned. God has delegated to man, a sort of subcreative power to perpetuate his own race. Such a wonderful work required a wonderful apparatus. And such is furnished. The texture of organs for this purpose is of the most tender and delicate kind, scarcely equalled by that of the eye, and quite as readily injured; and this fact ought to be known, and considered. But instead of leaving to human choice or caprice the execution of the power thus delegated, the great Creator has made it a matter of duty; and has connected with the lawful discharge of that duty, as with all others, enjoyment. But when this enjoyment is sought in any way, not in accordance with the laws prescribed by reason and revelation, we diminish (whatever giddy youth may suppose, ) the sum total of our own happiness. Now this is not the cold speculation of age, or monkish austerity. It is a sober matter of fact.

Posted 13:45 by John

Really, there's very little far-right opinion in Spain. There are no far-right political parties, unless you consider the national socialists in ETA to be far-right; I'd just call them far-out. The only far-right talk you'll hear, unless it's immigrant-bashing, which you can find anywhere, is in crummy bars whose aging patrons start knocking off chatos of wine long before lunchtime. These guys never had too many neurons anyway and the ones they've got left are pretty much frazzled.

This puts the lie to what I call the P.J. O'Rourke Fallacy. According to the O'Rourke Fallacy, in order to find out what is really happening in a country, you have to take a tour of the local bars. In my experience, though, the people you meet hanging out in bars--and I've hung out in bars, fairly assiduously, in five countries--tend to be drunks. Drunks may be many things, including, famously, honest, but they do not tend to be well-informed, nor are they highly efficient at processing the little information they have. In fact, they are almost certainly the last people you'd ask about anything if you wanted an intelligent answer to a serious question. You'd do much better inviting yourself to a Rotary Club lunch meeting if you want to meet locals. Or chat up a librarian. They tend to be well-read and know some English, and they're easily found at public libraries. There is, by the way John's Corollary to the O'Rourke Fallacy: The more time you spend hanging out in bars, the more likely you are to get fuddled and woozy and take poor notes.

Posted 13:28 by John

I just heard a country song with the line, "I was drunk the day my ma got out of prison". And now they're playing a live version of "Okie from Muskogee". Cool.

Posted 13:26 by John

Manuel Trallero is a rather ironic fellow whom I often disagree with--he does a good bit of America-bashing--but who can't stand the current Catalan government, either. Here's his bit in today's Vanguardia about Convergence and Union "conseller en cap" Artur Mas and the reprehensible proposal on immigration that he made in Quebec the other day. I'll let Trallero explain it.

Artur Mas, on his recent trip to Canada, requested the power to stamp the seal of approval on immigrants' papers, and that they then go to the window that says "Spain" to take care of the rest. The conseller en cap wants them with their Spanish and Catalan well-learned. I really don't think that's too much to ask. I think they should arrive already knowing "El virolai" by heart, eating "mongetes amb botifarra", playing dominoes, knowing what a caganer is, and being able to identify the Barça forward line that one season won the Five Cups. Dancing sardanas, giving a rose and a book on St. Jordi's Day, and watching Buenafuente's TV program get a better score.

We want hand-picked immigrants, nice and showered, and if possible baptized and converted to the true faith that created Europe. It doesn't matter if their names are Mohammed and Fatima as long as their children are named Jordi and Montse. From what we've seen, this and only this is what so-called integration consists of. This is a policy that has had wonderful results in the Francophone province of Canada. Thanks to the vote of the immigrants--to their vote against, of course--Quebec has lost one after another the successive referendums for independence. So, it seems, we Catalans, as usual, do it our way and fail again.

It is, without a doubt, a great achievement that, to carry out such a selection, Catalonia will have its own foreign representatives. And it's an even greater achievement, if that's possible, to have named the same gentleman who left the Republican Left with the contents of the strongbox to found another party, the PI, which he abandoned after an unprecented electoral disaster, to reappear now in a third, Convergence and Union, to become nothing more and nothing less than our man in Morocco. It is at the very least curious that those who wish to enjoy the alleged benefits of the Catalan dream may come to think that all of us Catalans are like Mr. Ángel Colom, a real example for children.

To sum up, we want immigrants who are perfect to preserve our national identity, when, precisely, Catalonia's national identity has consisted of "I tripped and fell here, I guess I'll stay here", as far as the 21st century, which is not just turkey snot. But what does not seem fine to me is that only immigrants have to be perfect, and the rest of the citizens, what about them? So, therefore, I'm anxiously awaiting the day that our authorities pass out certificates of perfect Catalanity, just like you used to have to get a certificate of good conduct in order to get a passport or a drivers' license. They'll probably make me repeat the course in September.

Someone mentioned my Catalan wife. See, my wife is a Catalan girl from the country. She laughs at the idea of anyone handing out certificates of Catalanity because no one could possibly deny her one. She doesn't think Barcelona is a really Catalan city; Catalan people, to her, are from the country and the small towns. She is always polite, but she snickers behind their backs at people who always go around trying to prove they're more Catalan than you. Those people, you see, all have a Castilian surname sometime in their recent genealogy. She doesn't. She's got nothing to prove to anybody. Also, here in Barcelona, a lot of people don't understand country Catalan. What they speak here is an either an educated, artificial "RP Catalan" dialect, like the one they use on TV Catalunya--Remei's friend Gemma, for example, uses that dialect--or a popular dialect heavily influenced in vocabulary and pronunciation by Spanish.

Watching Remei interact with other people in Barcelona is interesting. (In the country, she just uses Catalan.) When we go into a shop, there's always a little bit of feeling the other person out. If the other person seems to be a natural Catalan speaker, Remei instantly goes into country Catalan and you can see the other person's eyes light up a little--"One of us!" If the other person uses Spanish or not-very-good Catalan, she seamlessly flows into Spanish. I am convinced she doesn't do this consciously. I know she doesn't discriminate either, but I note we return to places where they speak Catalan--the basket shop down by the market, the bathroom fittings shop on Providencia, the lighting shop up on the Travessera de Dalt.

One important thing is that country people in Catalonia are pretty much the same as country people anywhere else in northeastern and north central Spain, as in Aragon or Old Castile or Navarra. They just speak a different language, but they think in similar ways--except politically--and they do similar things and live in a similar way. The food is a little different, OK, but that's about it. They're more like one another than either is like the country people of Andalusia to the south or the country people of France to the north. It's the city people, the "we've gotta-prove-we're more-Catalan-than-you" folks, who seize on minor or even invented regional customs (dancing sardanas, building human towers, holding correfocs) and regional foods (escudella i carn d'olla, tomato bread, all i oli, calçots) and declare them the heart and soul of Catalanity. Country people blow all that stuff off (except for the food) and watch the Barça and Spanish TV variety shows while listening to Spanish and international pop music.

Country people even have insulting names for Barcelona people; they are "quemacus", because they always say "Que maco!" (Wow, that's beautiful") when shown something countryish like, say, a field, or they are "pixapins" (pine-pissers), because they stop their cars by the side of the road to take a leak. Barcelona is "Can Fanga", "Mudville". I occasionally refer to Barcelona as Mudville on this blog; that's why. Girona, by the way, is "Can Fums", "Smoketown". Hey, Jesús Gil, next time Barça comes to play in Atlético's stadium, you guys ought to make a big banner telling the Barça players to go back to Can Fanga. Rhyme it with "pachanga". That would "meter un gol a" the Barça fans, since that's a name used only in rural Catalonia. The players wouldn't get it because they're all from Holland and Argentina.

Posted 11:58 by John

The Vanguardia is reporting that Colin Powell says the war is going to begin "shortly after" the next UN inspectors' report on March 7. They also say the Pentagon wants to attack during the new moon, which will be March 3-11; that fits with shortly after March 7, and that the Americans want to attack before the Iraqi desert starts heating up in April. That all makes sense, at least to me. Anyway, Powell is in Peking trying to bring the Chinese around. Aznar has apparently been given the mission of trying to bring around some of the Arab countries; he called up Qaddafi, of all people, and he's going to talk to the kings of Morocco and Jordan in an effort to gain their support. The king of Spain might get to do something useful here; the Spanish and Jordanian royal families are known to get on well. Our king has no power but theirs does, and if Juanca can actually influence Abdullah, he'll have earned his salary this year.

The EU foreign ministers are meeting today in Brussels. Aznar is going to talk to Chirac on Wednesday; Chirac will be back from his visit to Schröder by then. The Americans will be leaning on Security Council members Angola, Cameroon, and Guinea, whose votes are more or less openly for sale; Pakistan, who will find it very difficult to do more than abstain in the face of a pro-Iraqi public opinion; and Chile and Mexico, both of whom would probably like to vote with the Americans but are afraid their voters will interpret it as selling out to the gringos. There is considerably more anti-American feeling in Mexico than in Chile; on his way to see Bush in Texas over the weekend, Aznar stopped off to see Vicente Fox in Mexico. I have no idea how much good that did. Syria is out of the question; they're not even bothering to try.

The rumor is out that the US, the UK, Spain, and Italy will co-sponsor a second UN resolution this week on the use of force against Iraq. I'm not sure why the Vanguardia says Italy, since they're not on the Security Council. Bulgaria is on the Security Council and is the fourth sure vote the Alliance has. Chile is a likely five. The three African votes make eight. Mexico and Pakistan both look like pretty tough nuts to crack for a yes vote. French foreign minister Dominique de Villepin is now saying that he sees no reason for a second resolution and that UN inspections should continue. Hans Blix, meanwhile, said that "Iraq has no credibility, and if they ever had any they lost it in 1991". Blix, working for the supposedly neutral UN and a native of historically neutral country Sweden, seems more put out by Saddam than do Chirac and Schröder, leaders of former US allies.

The Vangua is trying to float the rumor that Bush is mongering war so he can get reelected. Let's see, first it was the oil, then it was the water, then it was the media, then it was testing out the weapons for the arms manufacturers, and now it's getting reelected. Any other ulterior motives out there for grabbing Saddam and hanging him off a lamppost? Oh, yeah, could be because Bush knows Saddam is a threat to peace and stability and has to go somewhere, either into exile on the French Riviera next door to Baby Doc Duvalier or, preferably, straight to hell. Naah, that's too obvious. Can't possibly be true. There's gotta be a conspiracy somewhere, and if we can't find one we'll just make it up.

How many conspiracy theorists does it take to change a lightbulb?
Fnord.

They gave Pedro Almodóvar another award, this time in England. Mr. Mushroom Hair took advantage of the occasion to say something monumentally goofy that nobody understood and which he failed to explain. It was something about America being a dark force. I think somebody ought to take a two-by-four to Mr. Almodóvar. Oh, I don't mean beat him half to death, just smack him across the butt a couple of times. Even better, we could hold him down and shave his head. Serious violence is reserved for Chevy Chase. God, I hate Chevy Chase. Even more than I hate Joe Piscopo.

Posted 19:03 by John

Anecdote: the Vanguardia reporter on the way to Bush's ranch saw what she thought was the "first and only antiwar demonstrator in Texas" holding up a hand-lettered sign. Nope. It was a high school kid advertising a bake sale. Anyway, Aznar and Bush were all, like, friendly and stuff. Bush treated José María to a few hugs and pats on the back and the editorial page says, you know, maybe it's not a bad idea for Spain to be friendly to America.

Tony Blair went to Rome, where he had a very nice audience with the Pope and then met with the people running the Vatican, Secretary of State Angelo Sodano and "Foreign Affairs minister" Jean-Louis Taurin. They told him that going to war with Saddam would be inhumanitarian because it would just make the situation "caused by the embargo" worse. I figure that if we can take out Saddam and his regime fairly cleanly and bloodlessly, which I think we can do, Iraq will instantly be flooded with humanitarian aid from all sides and the embargo will instantly stopped. Then the Iraqis can sell their oil and, like, invest the profits in fixing the country instead of building massive palaces and nasty weapons for a murderous thug. The Vangua is floating the rumor that Blair plans to convert to Catholicism after his mandate as P.M. is over

Comparing Saddam to Hitler is not fair. Hitler was much weirder. Saddam is a good old Timur or Genghis Khan-style Central Asian tribal gangster, and he's got a certain amount of Stalin in him as well. Do not expect this guy to go gently into that good night.

The Vangua's weekly alleged humor section today features a cartoon genealogy of President Bush; he's descended from one "Monkey Fitzgerald Bush", whose daughter "Lucy" mated with a donkey and gave rise to the Bush family we know. It's interesting how we tend to portray those we despise as subhuman. Der Stürmer used to do that a lot.

Things are getting unpleasant in the Basque Country. The closed-down newspaper accused of being an ETA front, "Egunkaria", is pulling the same stunt these people always pull when declared illegal; they've changed the name to "Egunero" and it's business as usual. They got about 50,000 ETA sympathizers out on the streets of San Sebastián to demonstrate against government repression; these people are from the ETA front party Herri Batasuna, the Basque nationalist party PNV, and the Communists. Cataloonies Esquerra Republicana are backing Egunwhatever, as is the Cataloony wing of Convergence and Union. International imbecile José Bové showed up at the demo in Bilbao. The Socialists are supporting the PP government for now. The PP have offered to combine with the Socialists and run a joint anti-ETA candidacy in the next Basque elections. The Socialists are saying no so far. Wait till ETA knocks a few more of them off--or don't they remember ex-Socialist minister, Ernest Lluch, a naive pro-dialogue appeaser peacenik, a "useful idiot" if there ever was one (don't get us wrong, he was a good and decent man, but not the brightest), whom ETA shot in the head right here in Barcelona? Or any more of ETA's more than 800 victims?

Twisted evil PNV president Xabier Arzalluz accused the PP of having, you guessed it, a conspiracy in mind. Seems that what they want to do is not close down a newspaper spewing ETA propaganda and operating as an ETA front, which is illegal in Spain. Spewing ETA propaganda, that is. (Note: the same thing would be illegal in the US. If somebody was putting out the Osama Daily News in the US, I guarantee they'd use something, probably the RICO law, to nail the bastards.) No, their sinister plot is to cause so much social disturbance that the next regional elections will have to be suspended. Yeah, right. Dirtbag ETA cop-killer Mikel Otegi and another ETA member have been busted by the French police. Otegi had been acquitted back in 1995 of the double murder of two Ertzaintzas (regional cops) whom he shot with his shotgun. No question about that. A jury let him off, though, because he was drunk and therefore not in control of his actions. Yep. They really did. He took off before they could find something else to arrest him for; now they want to retry him for that double murder on the grounds that a jury was improcedural for a case of terrorism, which should be heard before the Audiencia Nacional.

There's a Naomi Klein full-page op-ed in today's Vangua. Seems we're trying to overthrow democratically-elected Hugo Chávez in Venezuela and we're manipulating the Venezuelan media so we can get the oil. Very unimaginative, Naomi. There are much, much more creative conspiracy theories out there.

At the Césars, the French Oscars, Pedro Almodóvar won best European film. In his speech, he said, "I'm proud to be European in a European country where I don't have to speak out against the war, because its president already has." Gee, Pedro, since you're so happy to be in such a country, why don't you stay home from the Academy Awards in protest? Since the Oscar is manifestly not an award given out by unbiased judges, I don't see why they shouldn't bias their votes against Mr. Poofy Hair. I would if I had a vote. The guy looks like a goddamn mushroom with that pile of brush sticking up off the top of his fat face. Michael Moore also missed a good chance to shut up. In fact, he gets a coveted Iberian Notes Oscar, named after Oscar, my cat, who bites my hands--the hands that feed him--for saying, "I'm part of a majority of Americans who didn't vote for Bush, are therefore the victims of a coup d'etat, and want peace." Coup d'etat, huh, Mickey? So you're calling your country undemocratic and its government illegitimate? Them's pretty strong words, there.

People Who Infuriate Me So Much I'd Like to Stomp Their Faces In:

Michael Moore. Al Franken. Chevy Chase. That's about it. See, I'm calming down. The pills are kicking in. Oh, yeah, Martin Short, just because I hate his guts. And Pee-Wee Herman, on general principles. Give me a shot at only one and I'll pick Chevy Chase. Remember when Bruce Willis goes back and saves his hated and feared enemy, Marcellus Wallace, from the murderous redneck rapists? I'd like to think that I'd be brave enough to similarly step in for someone in that position, anyone at all. Except for Chevy Chase. Hell, I'd demand a chance to take my turn if I had that kind of shot at Chevy Chase.

The International Brigadists in Baghdad are coming home, split. They were given the Saddam tour of Baghdad, which some called "deplorable and pathetic" and seem to have figured out that, as one asks himself, "Is being against the intervention in Iraq being in favor of the regime?" Others responded that Iraq was under "foreign military oppression" and that those with questioning minds "didn't understand anything". Says one pacifist, "There's an abyss between us" and "(Future human shields) should decide now what their line will be in this city of palaces and poverty." Sounds like at least some of the Brigadists have a brain in there somewhere.

Posted 17:13 by John

Good Lord, the Barça's on a tear. I was waiting until I felt I had grounds for either optimism or pessimism before commenting in detail about the "new" FC Barcelona squad under coach Radomir Antic. Well, last weekend Barça beat Español in Español's home ground, the Estadio Olímpico, then on Tuesday they shellacked Inter Milan 3-0, and last night they whupped Betis in the Camp Nou, 4-0.

Is this just a flash in the pan or does it mean something? I think it means something. I think for the rest of the season we are going to see a Barça that will play up to its ability, which might even get them fourth place and will almost certainly get them sixth. Antic is running a tough-defense, physically-fit squad whose morale is up with three straight wins and the defenestration of Van Gaal. He's using a conservative, standard 4-4-2 alignment which, horrors, uses the stale old kick-and-rush! Passes the ball down the side and centers to somebody's head! Looks to catch the defense out of position on the counterattack! Practices strategy plays off corners and free kicks, since that's how most goals are scored! Shocking!

There are certain nutcases prominent in the Barcelona sports press who think that the Barça is above this kind of proletarian play, this grind-it-out Steel Curtain four-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust take-it-to-'em stuff. They want pretty-boy Dan Marino crap, clever passes and flashy plays, like they had back when Johan Cruyff was coaching Romario and Laudrup and Pep Guardiola. They're going to have to settle for some Jack Lambert and Mean Joe Greene kick-'em-when they're-up kick-'em-when-they're-down English-midtable-style football, with Saviola as the fast little goalscorer and Kluivert as the big oaf.

Here's what we've seen so far. Bonano, in goal, hasn't given up a goal in his last three games. The defense of Reiziger, in his natural position on the right, Puyol and Frank de Boer playing zone in the center, and Sorín on the left, is much solider than the risky three-man defense that Van Gaal was running. Reiziger and De Boer both look a hell of a lot better as part of a line of four rather than a line of three. They're not good enough to stop the opponent with only three of them back, but they do just fine with four. This guy Sorín is a pretty good player. Antic has been using the two outside defenders to mark the two guys he thinks are most dangerous, so against Betis they slapped Sorín on Joaquín and Reiziger on Denilson. It worked. Those guys were completely anulled. Cocu is not the factor he used to be but he's steady enough as a defense-oriented midfielder, and if he's turned loose he can score. Xavi has been allowed to move up as far as he wants, which puts him right behind the two forwards, big oaf Kluivert and Saviola. Saviola is on a roll, with a hat trick against Betis and two more against Inter; he's a pesky, fast little guy, the sort of guy who'd be a leadoff hitter in baseball. The wing positions are still up for grabs; Overmars was injured against Betis, so he'll be out for a while. Mendieta is looking a lot better than he was looking a couple of weeks ago. Luis Enrique is back, though I wouldn't use him to play a full game yet; I'd start him and then sub him with Motta when he gets tired. Rochemback, Gerard, and Gabri are the guys on the bench. I'd like to see them try replacing Frank de Boer with Gerard; the few times Gerard has played defense he's done well.

Barça is not going to win the League. It'll be very lucky if it finishes fourth, but I now firmly believe that sixth place in the League and the corresponding UEFA Cup slot are a legitimate possibility. They're not going to win every game, but they just might win two-thirds of them, in what's left of the League. There is still some time yet in which to make up ground, especially on Betis, Celta, and Real Sociedad, which is beginning to feel the heat and will be caught soon by either Madrid or Valencia or both. As for the Spanish Cup, they're eliminated, which is too bad, because Barca managed to redeem its two previous worst League seasons ever by winning the Cup in both years. (I distinctly remember watching the Cup Final in April 1988 on TV in a bar in Soria. Barcelona beat Real Sociedad, the Bakero and Beguiristain Real Sociedad, and salvaged a horrible season in which, of all people, Luis Aragonés took over as coach partway through.) And as for the Champions' League, it's not unthinkable. Barça will certainly make it through the second group and then will be in the quarterfinals with seven other teams. In a head-to-head competition like that, whoever's on a hot streak has an excellent chance of winning the whole thing, though the other teams are going to be tough; they're likely to be Man U, Milan, Inter, Juventus, Valencia, and two of this group: Roma, Arsenal, Ajax. No soft touches here.

Posted 11:54 by John

Just in case you're interested, here's the CNN transcript of the press conference George W. Bush and José María Aznar gave yesterday at Crawford, Texas, after their discussions. Bush mentions that they set up a four-way conference call with Tony Blair and Silvio Berlusconi. Despite contrary reports and mild waffling after last weekend's demos, these four leaders are all on board together.

I'm still looking for a transcript of what Pedro Almodóvar and Carme Sansa said at last weekend's anti-American demonstrations in Madrid and Barcelona, respectively. I simply cannot find it through searching Google or the Spanish newspapers. If you can find it, please let me know.

Posted 04:07 by John

Hero Bird Who Fought to Save Kindly Owner Convicts His Killer

Quite a story here. I wonder if my cats would do that for me if somebody broke in. Probably not. Oscar, Bart, and Lisa have always been apartment cats and are afraid of anything that's not one of their people. They would cower Frenchly under the bed.

Posted 19:41 by John

In case y'all were wondering what Nostradamus had to say about Saddam or Sudan or whatever his name is, click here for the full story. Here's a piece from the National Review that explains in simple language even I can understand why the United States isn't going into Iraq for the oil. Let me clear up something. Currently several companies, including French and Russians, have contracts with Iraq to exploit their deposits. My understanding is that they provide the technology for getting the oil and the personnel to run that technology, but that the oil itself belongs to Iraq until it is sold on the world market.

Posted 15:59 by John

I assume you've heard that there was a fire at a Rhode Island heavy metal bar where Great White was playing. (The band's own website is down. Their Capitol Records website is up. Turn on your audio and you can hear "Once Bitten, Twice Shy", which is their only song I remember, though I know they were around before that.) They were an up-and-coming L.A. band when I was in high school--one of those Quiet Riot-type hair-and-spandex bands that died out in the late '80s and were permanently killed by grunge and rap. Check out the Capitol website--they look like a real-life Spinal Tap, and check out their lyrics, which are incredibly dumb. Anyway, they were playing a gig at a 300-capacity venue in a redneck Rhode Island town. They kicked off their first song, and either those idiots or the moron club owner set off a bunch of pyrotechnics and the place just went up. At least 54 people are known dead and that's not all it's going to be. They all headed for the front door and ignored the other three exits, which were open. Damned shame. This is probably one of those things that happens once and then, because everyone sees that it was stupid to allow this to go on in the first place, never happens again. (Examples: "festival seating" after the Who concert where those people got crushed; excessive drinking in sports stadiums.) I guarantee you that, instantly, pyrotechnics will be prohibited indoors, and every building inspector in the goddamned country is going to inspect every nightclub in the country tomorrow.

Posted 14:25 by John

Here's a post from last November. It's on the history of Allied relations with Franco.

Just a thought, but why didn't the victorious allies get rid of that cunt Franco at the end of the war?
Des | Email | 11.25.02 - 8:55 pm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

During the war, Franco's personal sympathies were with the Axis. However, he managed to avoid openly committing himself to their side (in part he got lucky; he made major demands on Hitler in 1940 in exchange for joining the Axis, which Hitler refused. If Hitler had met those demands Franco would have entered the war and gone down for sure) and by '44 Churchill was openly flirting with Franco, knowing the war was won and not wanting to make it any longer by having to fight Spain, too. Using military force to overthrow Franco was never on the Allies' menu.

Anyway, on June 19, 1945, at the San Francisco Conference, the United Nations (which was the reincarnation of the Allied Powers) voted unanimously to exclude Franco's Spain. Then, at the Potsdam Conference later that summer, Stalin proposed that everyone break all relations with Spain, a worldwide total boycott, and that the Allies should aid the "democratic opposition" within Spain; Truman was in favor, though he feared another civil war, but Churchill wasn't. (This might be the last time the Americans and Soviets ever agreed on anything.)

Churchill pointed out, first, that Britain had strong trade links with Spain and the last thing anybody needed in Britain in 1945 was more people out of work due to a trade cutoff. He also said that "interference in the internal affairs of other states was contrary to the United Nations Charter." (Paul Preston, Franco, p.540; Chapter XXI in general). So Churchill made the same argument against getting rid of Franco that the anti-war people are making against getting rid of Saddam, who, to use your terminology, is an even bigger cunt than Franco was. Now, I'm not saying Franco wasn't a right cunt in many ways, but Saddam manages to out-cunt him, in my opinion. In the middle of Potsdam, Churchill lost a general election to Clement Attlee, who became Prime Minister; Attlee and Foreign Minister Ernest Bevin did not change British policy toward Spain. Anyway, the decision made at Potsdam was to definitely exclude Spain from the UN, but not to use economic and other diplomatic sanctions to try to force Franco out. Britain won out over the Soviets and Americans.

Bevin washed Britain's hands when he said to the Commons on 20 August 1945, "The question of the regime in Spain is one for the Spanish people to decide." Charles de Gaulle, president of the French Council of Ministers, "sent a secret message to Franco to the effect that he would resist left-wing pressure and would maintain diplomatic relations with him" sometime in summer 1945; French Foreign Minister Georges Bidault was also against action against Franco.

In January 1946, Dean Acheson, American Undersecretary of State, "suggested a joint declaration from France, the United States, and Britain that for Spain to be accepted into the international community, the Spanish people would have to remove Franco and set up a caretaker government to organize elections." But by then Washington was coming around to London's position, and Lord Halifax, the British Ambassador in Washington, pointed out the danger of a Communist takeover in Spain to Acheson. "American pressure diminished...British policy in fact aimed at restraining the French and the Americans from taking precipitate action against Franco." (p.552)

On 26 February, a month after De Gaulle's resignation, the French government closed the frontier with Spain and broke off economic relations after Franco executed ten left-wing guerrillas. France wanted to bring the question of a total economic blockade of Spain to the UN Security Council, but both London and Washington did not want to give the Soviets a chance to influence anything. On 4 March Paris, Washington, and London released the Tripartite Declaration, in which they called Franco a right cunt but said "There is no intention of interfering in the internal afairs of Spain." Franco privately accused Truman of being a Mason, which, of all things, he really was. It was no secret; it's in his autobiography.

Then on 5 March Churchill made the "Iron Curtain" speech in Fulton, Missouri, and it was all over.

Posted 14:01 by John

Oh, by the way, should you want to contact us personally, our e-mail address is crankyyanqui@yahoo.com.

Posted 12:27 by John

Here's an amusing little story from Fox News about the wave of French jokes that seems to be sweeping America. The French are mad; this is what they called "xenophobic Francophobia" in the Vanguardia a couple of days ago. This is rich from France, whose media seems to spend 90% of its time bashing America and the Americans. Like all pompous asses, the French can't stand ridicule. It punctures their overinflated national ego. So keep up the French jokes, people, and we'll do what we can here to whip up all the aggressive imperialist warmongering arrogant prepotent Francophobia we can.

How many Frenchmen does it take to change a lightbulb?
One to change the lightbulb, three more to form a delegation to ask the Germans for permission, five more to make up a committee to invent a French word for such a piece of foreign technology as a lightbulb, seven to organize the industrial espionage necessary to steal the lightbulb secret from the Americans, nine to compose the editorial in Le Monde that will celebrate the glorious French achievement in lightbulb development, eleven to bribe corrupt African dictators to give the French monopoly exclusive rights on lightbulbs in their countries, and thirteen to write a very thick book relating the grandeur of the French lightbulb industry to the heritage of the Revolution.

Today's main page three Vanguardia international headline: "Africa supports France against Bush". All fifty-two African states have voted, at the Franco-African summit in Paris, to follow the French line on Iraq policy. There's a lovely photo of Chirac talking with Thado Mbeki of South Africa, the guy who says that HIV doesn't cause AIDS and whose country has the highest murder rate known in the world, well over 100 per year per 100,000 people. (In comparison, in America it's five point something and in Spain it's three point something murders per 100,000 people.) At least Mbeki was elected more or less democratically; the other three guys in the picture are Kabila of the Congo, Kerekou of Benin (this guy is sort of OK, he was dictator for many years, got voted out, and then got voted in again), and Mugabe of Zimbabwe. Fine folks, those. Salt of the earth. The French managed to talk the Brits into letting Mugabe into the EU; he's under EU sanctions and isn't supposed to be able to enter. Patassé from the Central African Republic and Ngueso from the other Congo are being threatened with international human rights violations charges. Gbagbo of the Ivory Coast didn't show up because if he left the country he'd be overthrown. Other lovely governments in attendance were Libya's, Algeria's, Uganda's, Rwanda's, Ethiopia's, Eritrea's, Equatorial Guinea's, Malawi's, Angola's, Sudan's and Mozambique's. How much do you want to bet that each of these governments is responsible for many times the number of deaths that will be caused to civilians in the upcoming Iraq War?

African states in attendance that were once French possessions: Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad, Senegal, Guinea, Ivory Coast, Burkina Faso, Togo, Benin, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Djibouti, Gabon, Congo (Brazzaville), Madagascar, Comoros, Seychelles, Mauritius. Former Belgian possessions now under French influence: Congo (Kinshasa), Rwanda, Burundi. Out of all of them, the only two that Freedom House classifies as "free" are Mali and Benin. Those two countries have relatively honest democratic governments and are two of the few African countries making anything like progress. Mali, in particular, has won praise for its cooperation with the IMF, its ability to attract foreign investment, and its successful promotion of its cotton industry. Its per-capita GDP is, however, still under a thousand bucks a year.

The International Brigades in Baghdad report for today: they're trying to organize a soccer game against some university students. World peace is just around the corner. By the way, there are reports that Saddam's nutball son, who is in charge of sports in Iraq, has had losing athletes and coaches tortured and even killed. Wonder what'll happen to the Iraqi college kids if they lose to the Cataloonies. They'll probably just get bastinadoed or something mild like that.

The alleged Movement of Nonaligned Nations is meeting at Kuala Lumpur. They are organizing a Bush-bashing manifesto. It will have tremendous moral authority because the participating governments are all so highly respectable.

A Spanish judge has closed down Egunkaria, a Basque-language paper that received more than 7 million euros in Basque regional government subsidies between 1994 and 2001. The paper is accused of being an ETA front. Ten of its executives and managers were arrested. They're also investigating the network of Basque-language schools, the ikastolas, which are run by the Basque government and are widely considered to be hotbeds of pro-ETA agitation. I imagine the Basques are the most pro-terrorist people in the world, with 15% voting in favor of Herri Batasuna, the ETA political branch. Certainly they're the most pro-terrorist people in the so-called civilized world. If the ETA murdered you for whatever reason, or none at all (as in a terror bombing) 15% of the two million or so Basques would justify them, not feel sorry for you or think that they had done something wrong. I can only comprehend the insistence of the Spanish media on the idea of a fear-stricken American public when I see that the Basque Country really does live in fear of ETA bombings and killings and shootings. Many people have left the Basque Country because they are afraid, and rightly so since the ETA has murdered well more than 800 people in its history, mostly other Basques but also people in all parts of Spain. Spaniards can't understand that Americans aren't fear-stricken after 9-11 because they themselves are fear-stricken by the ETA--ask the people of Barcelona about Hipercor if you don't believe me.

Monsignor Asenjo, head of the Spanish bishops' conference, said that the statements by the Pope regarding the war on Iraq should be obeyed by Catholics, as should be all Papal declarations that are non-dogmatic. So much for freedom of thought. If you're pro-war, you're a sinner. I will also point out, again, that the behavior of most of the American mainstream Protestant churches is equally despicable.

Carlos Sentís of the Vangua says "The United States does not have the right to act on its own." So much for sovereignty. If Britain hadn't acted on its own between June 1940 and June 1941, where would we all be now? And, of course, this principle means that Spain does not have the right to act on its own, either (e.g. Perejíl Island), something that Sentís would furiously deny. The obligation to consult and cooperate is only America's. Not France's (e.g. Ivory Coast, where the French are currently acting on their own).

The Vodafone cellphone network in Spain went down yesterday. Everybody freaked out and called home from pay phones to tell their loved ones that nothing was wrong, it was just that their cellphones weren't working. There were big lines at phone booths. Jesus Christ. They're talking up mass psychosis in America over three thousand dead, yet when the cellphones crash in Barcelona everybody has to rush to call home. This is the lead story in the National News section.

The Franciscan rector at Vilanova, who was also the principal of an elementary school, was found shot dead in an isolated area notorious as a gay cruising spot. Their first story was that he had died in a car accident. Then they "found" the bullet wound in his throat. Now they're pushing the story that he was there investigating drug trafficking. See, the rector spent so much time investigating drug trafficking that the local mafia murdered him. That's what the Franciscans are saying. Me, I think he went down there to get his--uh, never mind. Just be careful if you're into rough trade.

One thing I think is interesting in the gay world is the taste for rough trade. Most of those guys--many of them kids--are lower-class heterosexuals who are doing it for the money and who are, frankly, being exploited by their clients. Just as I don't feel particulary sorry for middle-class kids who get shot when they go to the wrong part of town to score drugs, I don't feel particularly sorry for middle-class adult homosexuals who get knocked off by rentboys. Every man's death diminishes me, I know, and I wish no one got murdered ever, and I do feel sad for people who get murdered even if it was their own damn fault--but less sad than I do for people who aren't doing something they're not supposed to be doing. And Franciscan rectors are not supposed to be cruising for rentboys.

Posted 17:11 by John

A meme that has been repeated over and over in the Spanish press, ever since September 11, is that of Panic in the United States. Every couple of months some story about how the Americans are quaking in craven fear hits the papers. Yesterday it was La Vanguardia's turn. They print a health-care question every day and some kind of doctor answers it. It's usually a fairly solid and informative response and is a popular section of the paper. Yesterday's question was, "Is there a pre-war collective psychosis?" The author is one Narcís Mir, who is billed as the Director of Risk Observation, Institute of Security Studies. Whatever that is.

Can we say that these days we are in a situation of pre-war collective psychosis? In my opinion, Europe is not in that situation. Neither the "new" Europe of Blair, Berlusconi, or Aznar nor the "old" Europe of Chirac and Schröder. And this is despite the fact that some governments of this "new" Europe have made aneffort to create this climate, such as the purchase of a large supply of smallpox vaccine to protect us about the consequences of a possible attack in the war.

First, I thought we were talking about health care here, not politics. Second, the writer did not provide a lick of evidence except his own judgment in support of his opinion.

However, I believe the situation of the United States is different. It has been said many times that the attack on the Twin Towers constitutes an attack on the real and symbolic nucleus of their system of power. It was, for the Americans, the abrupt introduction of the consciousness of vulnerability. In these conditions, it is much easier to manipulate the citizens and submerge the population into a pre-war psychosis. We have seen these days some episodes of this, like the compulsive hoarding of food, batteries, or candles to confront a situation of war. Or the purchase of electrical tape to impede the entrance of lethal gases produced by a potential enemy bombardment, or even the panic set off in a Chicago discotheque, which produced a fatal avalanche.

1) Jesus Christ, any time something unfortunate like the Chicago disco panic happens in the United States the Europeans have to somehow chalk it up as America's fault. I vote next time a bunch of football hooligans causes a catastrophe in a European stadium we write a whole bunch of articles blaming the European social system for producing these unemployed no-hopers and making them frustrated and violent. 2) Again, he provides not a lick of legitimate evidence but his opinion. He certainly doesn't mention, say, having actually gone there. 3) People in Kansas normally keep a stock of canned food, bottled water, candles, and a battery radio. This is because we have TORNADOES. Here in Barcelona I keep a similar stock. This is because THE FRIGGIN' ELECTRICITY CUTS OUT ALL THE TIME AND YOU NEVER KNOW HOW LONG IT'LL BE. 4) These same European analysts of American life have been saying for years that we have some kind of mass psychosis of fear because of crime and violence and school shootings, but now they're saying that we felt invulnerable before the September 11 attacks. Which is it, guys?

But in order for this psychosis to emerge and maintain itself it is necessary that the system of government propaganda be used to the fullest, above all when a movement against Bush's warlike policy is beginning to take shape. And those who govern the United States are intensely concentrated upon this labor of propaganda these days.

Jesus Christ. There's a government-media conspiracy to propagandize the American people into collective psychosis so those who govern, whoever they are, can carry out their nefarious plots. Can anyone in his right mind possibly believe this?

Well, to top everything off, the Vangua publishes an extremely pretentious supplement on Wednesday called Culturas. The first four pages this week are all about panic, fear, and anxiety in America. Now, I was actually in Kansas last August. I did not notice a lot of panic, fear, or anxiety. If any readers are currently in America, would you mind doing a little report on panic, fear, and anxiety in your area down in the Comments section?

Andy Robinson says, "Other fears--Ebola or the imminent arrival of the African killer bee--seem like the projection of an anguish even more profound in the country of slavery, as filmmaker Michael Moore warns in his movie about the culture of fear Bowling in Columbine." He then explains how the culture of fear has made America a bunch of warmongers and how the big companies are manipulating us so we'll buy more stuff. He quotes Noam Chomsky, Clotaire Rapaille, Barry Glassner, and--get this--Marilyn Manson. I've had it with Robinson. He is the worst reporter I have ever read. Nothing he writes is neutral, yet it is printed as news rather than opinion. Every single one of his stories makes the same point: the United States is despicable and so are its citizens. The fact that the Vanguardia has hired him shows that their editorial staff doesn't recognize how inaccurate and one-sided Robinson's crap is. I do not think the Vanguardia is intentionally dishonest most of the time, which is pretty good for a Spanish newspaper. I just think they're not very smart.

There are three more articles. I'll just sort of summarize them here: "supermarket...freeway...fear...sniper...TV show...mirage...Third World...homeless...cannon fodder...fast food...dollars...terror...threat...danger...evil...death...panic...heretics...Satan...eradicate...French Revolution...collective values...Pearl Harbor...imperialism...ignorance...Yankee interests...obedience...Jack London...Nuremberg...McCarthyism...Hollywood...paranoia...Hiroshima...repression...brainwash." That ought to be enough for you to get the general idea.

Question: What motivates the Old Europeans to state so insistently that the Americans are panicking in terror?
Answer: Because if the Americans are terrorized, the terrorists have won, and that's precisely what the Old Europeans would really like to see in their heart of hearts. Maybe they aren't too big on a terrorist victory, but they would just love to see an American defeat. They need an American defeat so badly that they'll make one up if they have to. It all goes back to nationalism and comparative prestige in the end.

Posted 15:05 by John

Well, NATO has agreed to defend Turkey. The Dutch are going to send three Patriot batteries. NATO will send at least several of its AWACS, and chemical weapons cleanup teams will be sent. This stuff won't be all ready to go for a month.

Our prediction of war by February 18 was, obviously, wrong. I don't doubt, though, that war will eventually happen. Last weekend's demos had absolutely no effect on Alliance plans, I am sure. It seems, though, that there are obviously some preparations that could be made that haven't been made yet, but when are we going to decide that enough preparation is enough? I mean, we have around 200,000 soldiers in the area, the Brits have 30,000 more, and there are at least four aircraft carriers in the vicinity. Aren't we ready yet? I know that logistics is a lot more complicated and difficult than we civilians usually think and that it takes time to prepare dozens of different units for different tasks and make sure they're all going to get the job done right. In a sense, the longer we prepare, the better chance we'll have for a quick and bloodless win, since our army in the area is getting stronger at a much faster rate than Saddam's, which right now is as strong as it's ever giong to get. However, I can't think of any other good reason to postpone the attack. Well, I can. There are a few possibilities: 1) we're trying to foment a coup in Baghdad or a Skorzeny-type commando mission to grab Saddam and are waiting to see how it turns out 2) we're really going to wait until we get another UN resolution authorizing force in order not to dynamite the UN and NATO 3) the Pentagon is behaving like Lincoln's general McClellan and is unwilling to make a decision. (Lincoln to his secretary John Hay while reviewing McClellan's army: "Why, Hay, what is all this?" Hay: "Why, Mr. President, it's the Army of the Potomac." Lincoln (loudly): "No, no, Hay, this is General McClellan's bodyguard." Irate citizen to Lincoln: "General Grant is a drunk!" Lincoln: "He fights. Find out which brand of whiskey he drinks so I can supply some to my other generals.")

Munir Al Motassadeq, a Moroccan, was convicted and sentenced to 15 years in prison in a Hamburg court as part of a conspiracy to murder in the September 11 attacks. 15 years was the maximum penalty the judge could impose. Al Motassadeq was a member of Mohammed Atta's Hamburg cell that carried out the attacks.

Some idiotarian and idiot Catalans, 18 of 'em, have shown up in Baghdad to serve as human shields. They've been on the Saddam tour of the city and are bursting with venom for the Americans who blow up baby-milk factories and the like. They're very proud of themselves because they consider that they are an obstacle for Bush's warlike plans. I hope they don't get killed in the attack--they say openly that in case there's an actual attack they're going to scoot--but getting them back home after the war is over does not need to be one of our top priorities. And, of course, our knowledge that some of these nutso volunteers, who are going around calling themselves the "International Brigades", are at a military target, should by no means impede us from blowing up said target.

The French are whining about the irritated rumblings coming their way from America and are spinning to make the US the villains of the piece. It seems that a sinister Republican cabal, in the hands of the powerful American aerospace industry, is organizing the proposed boycott of French wine and cheese to force American airlines to buy American-made planes instead of French Airbuses. So say les grenouilles.

All I can say every time I read the latest news from the Vatican is "Holy Mary, Mother of God, how can you permit this stuff to go on?" Radio Vatican director Pasquale Borgomeo, yet another Latin European in the high ranks of the hierarchy, said that President Bush should "listen to the voice of the street, represented by those 110 million people (sic) who demonstrated last Saturday around the world and sent a very precise message to the politicians." He said that America was "ruled by an Administration which has conferred upon itself a mission of salvation. Despite the messages of the European allies and of the citizens, Bush seems to consider diplomacy as an irritating waste of time, international law as a bothersome stick between the spokes, the UN as a club of sophists." As for the demonstrations, they were "The most positive signal of globalization" because they "were a response to the fear that some governments are sowing." And, of course, "this war, each day that passes, seems more unjustified." Well, Mr. High and Mighty Vatican Radio Director, why don't you go bugger a teenage boy to make yourself feel better? Jesus Christ. As if the Vatican hadn't done enough to destroy its moral credibility already, now they're defending Saddam Hussein, after planting a big squishy one on apostate Tariq Aziz's ass. You know, over here in Europe, the Church has not learned the lesson of the pederasty scandals in America; they're still in denial and claim it's the result of an anti-Catholic campaign in the media.

There's a rumor going around the international press that there are three Iraqi mystery ships in the Indian Ocean just sailing around (illegally) under radio silence. These large (35,000 ton) cargo ships contain Saddam's hoard of weapons, says the rumor. They dock in certain Arab ports, especially in Yemen, to refuel and restock provisions. I'll have to see it to believe it, myself.

You may have heard that Jeb Bush visited Madrid earlier in the week and made a gaffe, referring to Prime Minister Aznar as the "President of the Spanish Republic." Spain is, of course, a monarchy. When Jeb later met Juan Carlos, the King made a joke: "Oh, you're the King of America's brother." Jeb also came to Barcelona and met with Jordi Pujol last night; they spoke in Spanish because, for once, an American politician speaks better Spanish than Pujol does English. Pujol has a very rough accent when he speaks English, but except for that his English is very good. He's a polyglot; he can speak French and German as well. Juan Carlos, as well as the rest of the royal family, speaks perfect English.

The cops busted fourteen punks in the Basque Country. They are accused of being ETA minor-leaguers, right now just collaborators waiting to make the big time. Several of them have police records for rioting and street violence, and several of them hold office in Jarrai or whatever it calls itself now, the ETA youth branch. I think the most appropriate punishment for a bunch of stupid punks like these guys would be a public caning on the bare buttocks--say, six strokes of the cane, hard enough to hurt like hell--and then an hour in the public stocks. Citizens would be urged to toss rotten eggs and tomatoes and the like. Perhaps baseball pitchers or cricket bowlers could be hired to provide a display of their throwing abilities. None of that would do too much damage, and it would be a massive deterrent. Public humiliation. People really do fear it.

Racist and anti-Semitic fool José Martí Gómez says in today's Vangua that America is just using the Aznar Government for its own purposes and will throw Spain aside when it is in American interests. Mr. Martí Gómez says that, for example, when Morocco demands the return of Ceuta and Melilla, which side will Washington choose? Uh, José, I think we'll choose Spain's side, since we acknowledge Spain's sovereignty over Ceuta and Mellilla. Also, Spain's a member of NATO and Morocco is not. Besides, gee, what if we decide it's more in our interest to be allied with wealthy, democratic Spain instead of poor, oppressed Morocco?

La Vanguardia has some wanker named Andy Robinson signed up as correspondent from New York. He's a far-lefty and writes only articles critical of the United States in some way. Today his spiel is that the big American TV networks are pushing for a war because they'll make a lot of money selling commercials during the live coverage. This is a brand-new meme; I've only seen it once before, spouted by Baltasar Porcel himself, but I have a feeling that we're going to see more of it, as it fits right in with the far-lefty conspiracy theory that says that either the government controls the media or the media controls the government and no matter which, they're up to something nefarious together. Says one Robin Anderson, who is billed as holding a Ph.D. in communication studies from Fordham, which along with 99 cents will get you a cup of coffee anywhere outside academia and whom Robinson probably picked up in a bar somewhere, "The war will be reported according to the advertisers' guidelines...it will be turned into a sort of reality show...imagine the viewer advancing shoulder-to-shoulder with a soldier through the streets of Baghdad. A lot of new technologies can be used and the viewer will feel empowered...We'll see great interest by companies for ads directed basically at young men, beer, cars, SUVs." Ms. Anderson and Mr. Robinson seem to believe that it's not about the oil, it's about the advertising. Or, wait, it's about controlling the water supply! No, sorry, that was Porcel again...

George Clooney missed a good chance to shut up in Madrid, where he is promoting his movie "Solaris". He said, "In the US, everything is going very badly. There are no dissident voices in my country. The most important television networks are going to make a lot more money if there's a war than if there isn't one.They don't let us actors talk, they blackball us. Sean Penn, who has made his opinion public and has gone to Iraq, is still going to spend a few months in ostracism, though he'll be all right because he has a lot of talent." Mr. Clooney also dissed Hollywood, saying that "In the US we don't have cinema, only box-office hits." Mr. Clooney wins Iberian Notes' coveted Oscar Award, named for my little black cat Oscar, who spends most of his time biting the hand that feeds him. Literally. Little Osky-poo shreds my hand, the very hand that opens his cans of cat food, whenever he feels like it. My shrink wondered whether I was cutting myself, my left hand is so chewed up.

As you almost certainly know, Jacques Chirac put his foot in it big-time on Monday. Reacting to the Eastern Europeans' strong pro-US stance over Iraq, Chirac said they showed "bad manners" and that their behavior was "irresponsible" and "dangerous". He accused them of being ungrateful to France, which has generously agreed to let them join the EU, and bashed them for their "Americanism". Chirac directly threatened Bulgaria and Romania, saying that "if they wanted to reduce their chances of joining the EU, they couldn't have done anything better than sign" the Vilna Ten letter. He said that the Eastern Europeans had "missed a good chance to shut up." The Eastern Europeans exploded, of course, with nasty reactions from the Czech Republic, Lithuania, and Romania; former Polish foreign minister Wladyslav Bartoszewski said, "We remember that it was the Americans who liberated Europe, including France, from Hitler in 1945, and we think they deserve gratitude for that on the part of all Europeans." Ouch. That was a smack right in the face. Tony Blair chimed in, calling Chirac a jackass for daring to lecture to the Eastern Europeans, who actually remember living under a dictatorship; not too many Frenchmen seem to remember when France was a dictatorship between 1940 and 1944.

Did you know that almost certainly more French were killed fighting for the Vichy French rather than De Gaulle's Free French? Most of them were sailors who were killed at Oran when the British sank the French Mediterranean fleet to keep it out of German hands after the French surrender. Some were killed in Algeria and Tunisia, too, in 1942 and '43, valiantly resisting the Anglo-American advance through North Africa. Vichy French forces lost at the very least 1200 men fighting with the Axis. Another bit of World War II trivia: it was Leon Degrelle's Belgian SS who were the last holdouts, or among the very last, on the German side during the attack on Berlin. Degrelle wound up escaping to Franco's Spain and living a long, undeservedly pleasant life.

Posted 00:58 by John

I have no idea whether Blogger is up or not. I wrote a long post that apparently got eaten because it isn't loading. If it hasn't come up tomorrow I'll try to summarize it. You may have lucked out--you may not have to read the whole bloody thing, but will instead be treated to a snappy recap of the main points instead..

Posted 13:01 by John

There really hasn't been much news over the last couple of days, at least not any you haven't already heard about somewhere else. What I thought I'd do is translate a couple of passages from The New Spaniards, a book by former Guardian reporter in Spain, John Hooper, that I think are very revealing about today's Spain.

The fact that Spain underwent a transition rather than a revolution or anything of the kind (after Franco's death) is another important reason why tolerance should have emerged as the supreme value in contemporary Spain. But it is also, I believe, one of the causes of something which goes beyond mere tolerance: a sort of ethical emptiness which is equally characteristic of today's Spain.

A survey in (Spanish newsmagazine) Cambio 16 carried out at the time of the (1991) Gulf crisis found that only 8 percent of Spaniards would give their life for their country; only 3 percent thought it worth dying for love or liberty; and a mere 2 percent would sacrifice themselves for an ideal. The results clearly astonished the magazine's proprietor, Juan Tomás de Salas, who wrote an impassioned editorial saying that it was time "Spaniards stop believing that our destiny on this planet is to enjoy, enjoy, enjoy and that our problems will be taken care of by others." As a description of the spirit of post-Franco Spain it could scarcely be bettered.

"Enjoy, enjoy, enjoy." Not at all an unsuitable motto for a nation which, according to a government survey conducted in the winter of 1989-90, had 138,200 bars--only slightly fewer than in the whole of the rest of the european Union. No other people I have ever encountered put as much effort as the Spanish into having a good time. whatever its political and economic problems, the country is an immensely entertaining place...Today's Spaniards do have a passion for life that matches their traditional fascination with death. Indeed, the two are almost certainly linked--thinking so much about death gives them a heightened appreciation of life. An explosion of carefree hedonism was doubtless inevitable after so many years of oppression under Francop. What seems to have delayed it was the lack of real economic growth between 1975 and 1985. But if you look back over Spain's recent past what you see is a pattern of civil war followed by military dictatorship, not unlike that which characterized seventeenth-century England. It is perhaps not surprising therefore that Restoration Spain should have much the same frivolous air as Restoration England. Almodóvar as Congreve? There are worse comparisons.

Yeah, there are, like for example comparing my ass with the Hubble Space Telescope. Come on, dude, you're stretching it a bit thin there, and that stuff about the Spaniards and their fascination with death is a load of wank perpetrated by people who actually take Ernest Hemingway seriously.However, Mr. Hooper is absolutely correct about Spain's tolerance, its fun-loving spirit, its sheer entertainment value--and its complete ethical confusion.

The virtual absence of ideology from Spanish politics is also one of the most evident signs of something commented on in an earlier chapter: a certain moral vacuousness. By that I do not mean to suggest that today's Spaniards are amoral. When the dividing line between good and bad is clear, they are capable of mounting demonstrations of support or protest that put the rest of Europe to shame. If some young girl disappears into the clutches of a child-molester, for example, you can expect that thousands--and I mean thousands--of people will turn out onto the streets of her hometown to support her relatives and demonstrate their outrage. Today's Spaniard usually has his or her heart in the right place.

It is when the choice is difficult, when the moral dilemma is unexpected or unfamiliar, that the gap becomes apparent. How do you reconcile the conflicting demands for higher pay and lower unemployment? To what extent do women have a "right to choose" over abortion? And what really could be done about Bosnia? It is on these sorts of issues that the quality of debate can be low, with opinion-formers frequently choosing to take refuge in platitudes and aphorisms.

It is a phenomenon often attributed to the waning influence of the Roman Catholic church. The theory does not rest on whether the values supplied by the church were right or wrong, but on the fact that they were virtually the only ones the Spaniards had. In Britain, France, and Germany, and in other societies with more than one religion, there is a tradition of choosing between different moral outlooks which goes back centuries. In Spain, that tradition barely exists. Pople have had little choice but to take their ethical bearings from the Roman Catholic church, the only decision open to them being whether to accept or reject what is taught.

The prevalence of instinctively Catholic attitudes is far greater than the Spanish themselves perhaps realize. Castilian is crammed with phrases drawn from Catholic practice and dogma...Take away the creed which is at the root of these ideas and you--or they--are left with little but common sense. Because of the absence of a rival to Catholicism in Spain, the step which might take a British Anglican into Catholicism, or a French Catholic into Humanism, can launch their Spanish counterpart into a sort of ethical void in which he or she has to rely on a largely instinctive sense of what is good and bad...the fact that Spaniards find themselves all of a sudden left to their own ethical devices may provide a further explanation for that super-permissive atmosphere which imbues the new Spain.

Mr Hooper is right about the super-permissive and tolerant atmosphere in Spain. Teenagers openly smoke dope in public squares. Hardcore porn is available in plain sight at the local newsstand. The drinking age is whether you're tall enough to put your money on the bar or not. There are more topless chicks--and grandmas--at the beach than there are fully clothed. You can, literally, party without stopping for a week if you want to (and don't have to go to work).

I think Hooper is at least partly right about Spaniards' moral confusion. Catholicism is pretty much dead here--I doubt more than ten percent of people in Barcelona actually go to church, and I doubt that more than a quarter actually believe in the Christian God, though it is certainly true that Spain is culturally very Catholic and that many Catholic attitudes have survived and will survive here. To a great degree among literate people, a sort of vulgar Marxism has replaced Catholicism as a framework for their ideas, with all the problems that implies. The great majority of the working- and middle-classes are, in addition, believers in a paternalistic State that guarantees their lives from the cradle to the grave; this attitude is at least partially a remnant of Francoism and partially caused by the fact that Spain was damned poor until 1960 and pretty poor until about 1985. The fact that Marxism and neo-Francoism--neither of which are too big on capitalism or independent thinking--have been stirred in with what's left of the Catholic tradition in Spain, which has also never been too big on capitalism or independent thinking, causes most Spaniards' ideology, if you can call it that, to be a mix of paternalism, Socialism, and what they call here "philias and phobias". Most Spaniards have a particular foreign country that they rather admire, and can be called Francophiles or Anglophiles or Germanophiles, and another which they rather dislike, which is generally capitalist, antipaternalist, freethinking, aclerical America. There are Americaphiles here, but they're not more than 10% of the population and they often admire America for the wrong reasons.

Another reason intellectual debate here in the Hispanosphere often seems to be of low quality is, frankly, because it is. Spanish has a lot of speakers, but not too many of those speakers are well-educated; let's say that there are about 50 million well-educated Spanish speakers. I imagine that there are at least 150 million educated English-speakers, and I also imagine that English is by a long way the world language with the greatest number of educated speakers. I submit that the more educated speakers a language has, the higher the average level of debate in that language will be. Spanish has no New Statesman or Spectator or New Republic or National Review--it really doesn't have a Time or Newsweek, either, much less an Economist--and it has no Internet presence or scientific / technological presence. Its newspapers pale in comparison with the Daily Telegraph or the Washington Post or the Wall Street Journal. What European languages often have that we don't are thick, dull, semi-philosophical texts written by some professor somewhere that get published because no one else in that language produces anything to print. They think, since they have this highbrow crap that nobody reads, that this makes them respectable intellectuals. I'm afraid they're wrong.

Posted 14:04 by John

We're looking up wacky anti-American sites on Google and found this one, which is apparently by Shining Path of Peru. We won't bother to translate it, but it does refer to the Americans as a bunch of "capitalist bloodsuckers". It's a wondrous example of Spanish-language blind Marxist-Maoist rhetoric. You'll want to take this opportunity to wallow in the majesty of Presidente Gonzalo's all-powerful thought. I hope the CIA is at the very least watching these people. For more insane anti-American stuff, we googled "contra el imperialism yanqui" and found all kinds of truly loopy agitprop. Check it out here.

Posted 18:34 by John

I'm still looking up Almodóvar's demo speech and I can't find it. I did find this from the Barcelona squatters' page, though, which calls for a boycott of the movie Talk to Her on the grounds that cruelty to animals was practiced during the bullfight scene. Finally I agree with the squatters! Boycott Almodóvar!

Posted 13:28 by John

I'm looking up Almodóvar to see what he said at the big demo yesterday in Madrid. Haven't found it yet but I did stumble onto a Spanish message board where the question is, "Did the Spanish Academy err when they selected Mondays in the Sun to be the Spanish representative at this year's Oscars rather than Almodóvar's Talk to Her?" Mondays in the Sun is a Spanish lefty social commentary flick done by the usual government-subsidized jokers, including at least a couple of the Bardems, who are ultra-Communists. One of them just died and the was buried with a Communist party flag on his coffin. Anyway, you would think that this would be a nice, innocuous subject, a debate about which of two movies is better. Some of the opinions in the chat room are quite reasonable. However, here are some of the others:

15 - Ojalá se estrellaran 2 aviones en la gala de Hollywood y se fueran todos esos cabrones al carajo.
I hope two airplanes crash into the Hollywood gala and send all those bastards to hell.

22 - HAGAMOS LA GUERRA PERO EN EEUU y a ver si de una vez por toda se va ese puto pais al carajo.
Let's go to war but in the US and see if once and for all that fucking country goes to hell.

28 - Los Lunes al sol es un cine tan político como el pianista guns of new york o cualquiera de los bodrios ultraderechistas que nos endiñan al menor descuido. ¿Que no la han elegido? pues bueno, pues vale, pues bien. Es muy duro admitir que te escupan en la cara...¡Ah! se me olvidaba: ¡NO A LA GUERRA!
Mondays in the Sun is just as political a cinema as The Pianist, Guns (sic) of New York, or any of the ultra-right-wing garbage they palm off on us unless we watch out. They didn't choose it? Fine, who cares. It's very hard to admit it when they spit in your face...Oh, I forgot, no to the war!

35 - Mejor, este es un concurso Infecto, la pelicula es extraordinaria, al igual que la interpretación de Javier Bardem, pero los capitoste del decrepito cine de holibu, actuan al dictado de Bush. han castigado tanto a Fernando Leon,como a Javier Bardem por decir NO A LA GUERRA. Es una verguenza.
Fine, this is a phony competetion, the movie is extraordinary and so is Javier Bardem's performance, but the bosses of the decrepit Hollywood cinema, act at Bush's orders. They've punished both Fernando León and Javier Bardem for saying no to the war. It's pathetic.

36 - No jodais, que le den a los Americanos que no tienen ni idea de cine de verdad...Y por supuesto que la Academia española no se ha equivocado al elegir la película, son los americanos los que se han equivocado!.
No shit, fuck the Americans, who have no idea of real cinema...and of course the Spanish Academy didn't make a mistake choosing the film, it's the Americans who are wrong!

43 - Lo que está claro es que la imagen de Bardem proclamando a los cuatro vientos "NO A LA GUERRA" ha debido de incomodar a la academia norteamericana...
What's obvious is that the image of Bardem proclaiming no to the war must have made the American Academy uncomfortable.

Just thought you folks might find these comments enlightening. I didn't leave a message on the message board. You might want to, I don't know. Here's the link.

Posted 12:44 by John

Sorry. I made a post last night and another this morning and they don't seem to have loaded. I don't know whether this one will. The Comments don't seem to be working, either. It's probably the Cataloony Communists or their minions. They're trying to silence me, the only voice out there puncturing their pomposity! You're not paranoid if you know they're really after you.

Posted 12:39 by John

I did a little research this morning. I looked up the manifestos and the demonstrations that were held in Spain against the NATO intervention in the Balkans. In case you don't believe me, here's a Spanish activists' page from 1999 proudly talking about the demos they'd held against the war. Now, we know that Slobodan Milosevic was a major prick, that 200,000 or so people were killed in the fighting in the ex-Yugoslavia, most of them civilians murdered by Serbs, and that more than 850,000 people were forced to leave their homes. Probably the most famous single events of the Balkan wars were the massacre at Srbrenica, where at least six thousand mostly Muslim men were murdered by Serbs, and the two-year shelling of Sarajevo, which culminated with a direct hit on the marketplace in August 1995 that killed 43 people and convinced the United States to say enough was enough. We then forced them to reach the accord at Dayton which stopped the war in Bosnia, and when they tried the same thing in Kosovo and killed some 3000-10,000 people, the Americans said no way, José, and organized NATO into the bombing campaign that resulted in the end of the Kosovo war and the eventual fall of Milosevic. Here's the United Nations' indictment before the International War Crimes Tribunal in case you need your memory refreshed about exactly how evil Slobodan is.

Among those who publicly opposed the war in Kosovo and accused the Americans of imperialism and mass murder and wanting the oil and the like were Ramsey Clark, Robert Fisk, Edward Said, Noam Chomsky, José Saramago, Mumia Abu-Jamal, Regis Débray, Eduardo Galeano, Tony Benn, Alice Mahon, and Ignacio Ramonet. Oh, yeah, Fidel Castro too. Seen those names recently in a similar context? Among the Spanish organizations that demonstrated publicly against the Kosovo war were the "mainstream Communist" United Left political party, the ETA front political party Herri Batasuna, the PCE(r) (a bunch of real wacko far leftists who support the terrorist gang GRAPO), the Green Party, and the Trotskyist labor union, third largest in the country, CGT. These folks were among the organizers of the anti-American "peace" protests yesterday in Spain. To their credit, the Spanish Socialist Party did not oppose the Kosovo intervention, and neither did Convergence and Union.

Posted 19:07 by John

Well, they read the platform of the demonstration, the "Let's Stop the War" platform, which all the sponsoring bodies signed onto. It consisted of a virulent anti-American harangue spoken by the actress Carme Sansa, which basically accused America and Americans of wanting Iraqi babies to die so we could get more oil. It was foul and it stank of hate. It demanded not only an American climbdown before the Franco-German position, which I could almost understand, but demanded the lifting of the embargo on Iraq, the "national unification of the Kurdish people", the enforcement of the UN resolutions against Israel, and, like, justice and shit for the Palestinian people. All these demands were spiced with violently anti-American rhetoric reminiscent of the best days of the Moscow Party line, which a lot of these people followed at one time or another. In fact, the point of the demonstration wasn't to protest against war, it was to protest against America.

And the crowd shouted along and applauded. Hundreds and thousands of them. I was repulsed. I am repulsed. It was sickening. I have never seen so much anti-Americanism concentrated in one place. Among the signs held up were "Aznar lameculos de Bush" (Aznar, Bush's ass-licker), "No somos el ojete de Bush" (We aren't Bush's asshole), and "Fuck Bush" (original English, quite large). All the politicians participated in the march and said how wonderful it was that all the people were marching together for peace and that this just proved what wonderful people Catalans are. Socialist Mayor Joan Clos and Communist leader Joan Saura were rather outspoken in their America-bashing, while the others refrained from naming names and spouted a bit of guff about peace. Wise old fox Jordi Pujol didn't show up, but Artur Mas and Joan Rigol from the conservative-yet-anti-American Convergence and Union party did. So did Pasqual Maragall.

There's no doubt, the verdict of the people of Barcelona is overwhelming. They don't like us. Not one bit. They came out and told us so, in public, loud and clear. It's a beautiful city, but keep today in mind when planning your future vacations.

Pedro Almodóvar is going to read the speech at the demo in Madrid. Let's see what he has to say, and then see how it compares with what he says when he shows up at the Academy Awards ceremony. By the way, the movie to boycott is "Hable con ella" (Talk to Her). Pedro Almódovar's hard to miss. He's the guy who can't speak English who made a fool of himself at the Academy Awards a couple of years ago when he won something. He is rather flamboyant. He has a big poofy hairdo.

Posted 17:23 by John

I'm not going down to the demo, since I'd probably get mad and get in a fight. That would not be good. The demo is being televised live on Catalunya TV; they've cut away and will be back in fifteen minutes or so. There are police helicopters, two of them, flying over our neighborhood. The demo started at the corner of Diagonal and Paseo de Gràcia at five sharp with all the politicians in front. The turnout is enormous. I have no way of judging how many people are there but there are a hell of a lot. I saw a Republican Left balloon, a whole bunch of red flags interspersed with Catalan ones, a couple of Spanish Republican flags and a couple of Cuban flags, and a lot of hand-lettered signs, mostly saying unpleasant things about Bush and / or Aznar. It's chilly out, too, and they're getting a lot of people. The trains and buses are all full and they can't get in and out of the metro at the downtown stations. The official demo route goes down Paseo de Gràcia, the city's main commercial street, known for its architecture, for a mile or so and then makes a left on Gran Vía and goes another half-mile or so to Plaza Tetuán. I'll keep y'all posted.

Posted 15:50 by John

Well, the big demo starts in just under two hours. As I have said before, the Barcelona demo is sponsored by, among others, the Socialist Party and its labor union, the Communist Party and its labor union, the Republican Left, and conservative Catalan nationalists Convergence and Union. Also among the sponsors are a group of violent anarchist squatters and at least two organizations that justify and apologize for ETA terrorism. Are these people pacifists? Of course they are not. They approve of the use of violence in circumstances where it favors their ideological goals. They approve of Zapatista violence and of Sandinista violence and Tupamaro violence. They approve of the Russian Revolution and of the French Revolution. They approve of the violence used against businesses that stay open the day of a general strike. At least some of them approve of the violence meted out against the United States on September 11; I am sure that all those who vote Communist, some 5% of Spaniards, and those to their left, another 1 or 2 percent, approve of the attacks and think America got what it deserved.

This is not a pacifist demo. If it were, they would be protesting at the French intervention in the Ivory Coast. They're not. They would be protesting at the ridiculous situation in Central Africa in Congo and Rwanda and Burundi and Uganda with Zimbabwean and Angolan troops in the middle and the French with no idea what to do, but they're not. They would be protesting at the brutal gangs running Sierra Leone and Liberia and Guinea and the rest of West Africa. They've never heard of those places. They would have been protesting at what happened in East Timor. They didn't. They would have been protesting at the Russian crushing of the Chechens, whether bandits and terrorists or not. They didn't. They would have been protesting at the evil Taliban takeover of Afghanistan. They didn't. They would have been protesting about Bosnia and Kosovo--wait a minute, they did. Half of them blamed America for the "root causes"--y'all who weren't over here then may not have heard about the anti-intervention demos in Europe over Kosovo, especially--and protested against our intervention and the other half blamed America for not intervening fast enough.

This is just not an anti-war or anti-violence protest. None of these people gives a rat's ass about the Iraqis. If they did, they'd do something to help to overthrow the murderer and oppressor Saddam. This is, pure and simple, an anti-American protest. It is an opportunity for a crew of the usual suspects, the left and the nationalists, to spew hatred and enjoy doing it. I forgive them. It's not their fault they hate us after all the crap both their media and our media fill them full of. The ones I won't forgive are the little crowd of Americans who protested at the American embassy in Madrid yesterday. They have their right to voice their opinions, of course. And I have the right to despise them for those opinions. It's in appalling taste, it shows a lack of moral compass, and it's just plain stupid for an American to join in this America-bashing, America-smearing orgy, especially in a foreign country. It's like a black guy marching at the head of a Klan rally and carrying the torch they're going to use to light the cross.

Posted 14:01 by John

Here's a link to a Saturday Night Live cast interview with Playboy in 1976. The first excerpt is extremely sad, whether they were being serious or kidding. The second one just shows what a prick Chevy Chase always has been.

Aykroyd: I would lodge a personal protest if I knew anybody was working under the influence. I would refuse to go on camera with him. That's the way I feel about it. It's a matter of breaking the law that's there to legislate physical purity, which is all we have to work with, this body.

Belushi: It's a discipline. It's like Muhammad Ali when he trains for a fight. He's been in this long because of discipline. If we burn ourselves out with drugs or alcohol, we won't have long to go in this business. You can't work with an alcoholic or a drug addict....

--------------------------

Chase: Yeah. Let me put it this way. The election was so close that that had he (Ford) taken New York, he would have tied the electoral vote. It's the most heinously egotistical thing to say I had anything to do with it, but I think it must have had some influence. I was clearly not a Ford fan. I was, in fact, a Udall man.

Playboy: How about after the convention?

Chase: I supported Carter. Carter was the better man. It's not that Ford isn't a nice fella. It's just that he never gave a shit about people.

Playboy: Why was Ford such a subject for parody? Was he inherently funny?

Chase: Anybody who was so guilty about being President that he kept trying to kill himself was inherently funny. It was the guilt that kept him banging his head on helicopter doors.

Playboy: When you hosted the Radio and Television Correspondents' banquet in Washington, the one that Ford also attended, what did your act consist of?

Chase: I just did Ford. I was him. I was invited to be the host. I marched in with the President to Hail to the Chief and sat on the dais between the secretary of the Navy or somebody and the President. I was a little nervous because I didn't exactly know what I was going to do, except that I was going to stumble a lot, walk into the podium and do my terrible impression of Ford. I took John and Dan down as my Secret Service escort--mostly so they could have the experience and wear dark glasses. John, at that time, could still walk.

Posted 12:48 by John

Postulate: The purpose of government is to protect its citizens' human rights.
Postulate: The basic human rights are those of life, liberty, and property.
Since no one is more zealous in the preservation of his rights than the citizen himself, he should be the one who decides what the government must and can't do through some kind of regulated voting system.
In order to prevent possible abuses of human rights by a true democracy (e.g. we all get mad at Socrates and decide he must be executed), previously agreed-upon limits on the government's power must be set down in writing.
Theorem: The system that best protects these three basic human rights is a government elected by the citizens that is restricted by the rule of law.
Argument: While imperfect, the United States government is elected by its citizens and does operate under the rule of law. It is thereby empowered to protect its citizens and their rights, if it operates within its own laws in doing so.

Any quibbles? Argue with my logic if you want, and I'm sure I've committed at least one error that Aristotle would immediately call bogus on, but if we don't fundamentally agree on these things, we're just not operating on the same page.

So, the United States government's main duty is to protect its citizens against infringements on their rights from inside the country (criminals, outlaws, fraudsters, robbers, wannabe dictators, unscrupulous politicians and military officers) and from outside the country (invaders, terrorists, pirates, raiders).
On September 11, 2001, the rights to life, liberty, and property of many more than the 3000 citizens killed directly by extremist Muslim terrorists were infringed upon from outside the country. If we include the pursuit of happiness, basically a reformulation of the rights of liberty and property, as a right, then the terrorists infringed upon every American's rights. Every American's basic rights are threatened by terrorism.

Are we still together? I hope so.

In order to protect the rights of its citizens, the United States government has two responsibilities: to punish those responsible for the past infringement of rights, in order to demonstrate that violators of Americans' rights must pay serious consequences to discourage others from doing the same thing, and to impede those who may not have learned the lesson not to mess with Americans' rights from doing exactly that in the future.
In response to the grave violation of Americans' rights that happened on 9-11, those responsible must be punished. Many of them, Al Qaeda members and their protectors in the Taliban, already have been. But many of them haven't yet. Also, those who plan to violate Americans' rights must be stopped before the violation can happen.

Any problems here? I don't see any myself except for the standard pacifist argument that all violence should be renounced.

Postulate: You can't renounce violence completely. The only ways to stop infringers of rights are to threaten them with violence (you burglarize your neighbor's home, you're violating his rights, you will be arrested, tried, convicted, and sent to jail; if you try to escape before you are released, you will be shot) or to actually use violence against them (note that when the Japanese violated American rights at Pearl Harbor, we blew up their homeland in retaliation). Renouncing violence may be highly moral, but it is not precisely a good survival and defense mechanism.

OK, here it comes.

I submit that there is a loose alliance of terrorist organizations and rogue states, including Al Qaeda, Iraq, the PLO, Syria, the PFLP, Sudan, Hezbollah, Iran, the ETA, North Korea, Islamic Jihad, Libya, the FARC, Cuba, Abu Sayyaf, the Al Aqsa Martyrs, ad infinitum. The common enemies of these organizations are capitalist democracy and human rights, symbolized by the United States, their chief hate. Their motivation is wounded pride caused by their own weakness. I also submit that several so-called American allies, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Pakistan, harbor many sympathizers with the cause of the terrorist organizations and rogue states. I do not consider this to be a conspiracy theory because there is a good deal of evidence that these people are actually conspiring--ETA guys training in PLO camps in Libya and the like. There are thousands of similar connections. A connection nearly all these groups and states have is with the former Soviet Union; they received subsidies, arms, training, infrastructure, and many other kinds of support from the Soviets. The lion is dead but the hyenas and jackals that trotted at its heels are still alive.

All of these states and organizations are involved either directly or indirectly in the 9-11 bombings. Either they actually did it themselves or they, at one time or another, trained, supplied, funded, hid out, collaborated with, or somehow helped the guys who did it. They must, therefore, be punished for what they did so that in the long term no one ever gets the idea in his head that he can violate Americans' rights in such a way again, and those whose goal is still to violate Americans' rights must be impeded from doing so in the short term. The best and by far most effective way to impede them is by using violence. That violence, of course, must be as limited as possible.

America is very careful about using violence inside its borders. The police and judicial system, whose job is to enforce the laws that protect us against internal violations of our rights, operate under a great many legal limitations that are also designed to prevent citizens' rights, in this case against overzealous, corrupt, or arbitrary treatment which would violate the rights of the accused. He's a citizen and he has rights, too, unless a judge should take them away from him after due process. (Note that judicial punishment #1, the death penalty, deprives the convict of his right to life, punishment #2, jail, deprives him of his liberty, and punishment #3, a fine, deprives him of his property.) False arrest or imprisonment or conviction or police shooting of a citizen are treated as major scandals within the US, and deservedly so.

The problem is that there is no world legal system. The United Nations does not protect citizens of states; it protects states. It is an organization of governments, not of peoples. Most of these governments are dictatorships and most of them are murderous, corrupt, or both. They are in violation of every single line in the UN Charter and of every single honest resolution the UN has passed. Yet the UN insists on protecting them, because the UN is a union of dictatorships. In fact, for most of the UN's career two dictatorships held veto power over every significant UN action, and even today one dictatorship and one corrupt half-dictatorship hold veto power. The UN is by no means democratic, and it is by no means a legitimate organization. It holds no honest elections and it obeys no rule of law. It does nothing useful to protect anybody's basic human rights, much less those of American citizens. I submit that the United States has no reason even to be a member of the UN, much less to actually pay any attention to any of its dictates.

NATO is a different story. NATO is a union of democracies, and it has always been made up mostly of democracies. The problem with NATO is that a minority can hold out and stymie the alliance because each country has veto power. However, there's nothing that says the United States has to operate within the confines of NATO if it feels that its citizens' rights are in danger. The fact that fifteen NATO countries support the US and three do not is telling, and the fact that the Gang of Eight and the Vilnius 10 also support the US is even more telling. The great majority of decent, democratic states in this world are on America's side because they value their citizens' human rights and they know just as well as the Americans that the loose terrorist-rogue state alliance is a threat to them, too.

As for the European Union, we're not a member, so who cares what they say?

Three notes. I am not saying that might makes right. I am saying that governments have the duty to protect their citizens and their rights, and if America's government does so and somebody else gets pissed off, that is that somebody else's problem. You can't get your rights if you don't have any might. There are many kinds of might, not only economic and military and political, but also moral. The Western democracies, including America, have might. Their responsibility is to use it well. Second, I understand that citizens of other countries should enjoy the same rights that America's government more or less successfully guarantees to its citizens. This is why I hate dictatorships and corruption, and why I am unwilling to respect any country's government that tolerates such things at home. The problem is tolerating such things abroad. The United States cannot solve everyone's problems, and it should avoid intervening in other people's business as much as possible. We should never fight against any other democracy under the rule of law. Those people are taking care of their own rights. We often must deal with dictatorships. As a practical manner, we can't just cut off all relations with, say, China, much as we'd like to. But we don't have to be any friendlier than necessary, and if some dictatorship is genuinely a threat to the people of the United States and the civilized world, we should have no qualms about wiping it out, just as we would have no qualms about wiping out an organized crime family back home. We will be safer and their people will be much better off. Third is the "who are we to judge?" argument. Well, as an internal matter, who are we to judge those of our citizens who try to kill or kidnap or steal? Who are we to put them in prison or fine them or execute them? We are the legally established government, elected by its citizens and bound by the Constitution. That's who we are to judge. I don't see the difference between an individual who kills or kidnaps or steals and a state or an organization that does so. They're all dangerous to our rights. They all must be stopped.

Posted 10:53 by John

It's gray and chilly today in Barcelona, about 40 degrees or so with a light drizzle. This ought to keep a few of the peaceniks home from the demo this afternoon. On Saturday mornings most of us Barcelonese have to be alert for the butane-tank man. You see, we don't have central heating here. You can get it, and it's not very expensive--we could afford it and we sure ain't rich--but it just seems unnecessary to install when you would only use it five or ten days out of the year and when effective butane-powered space heaters are available for a hundred bucks or so and last for years. A replacement of the butane tank costs eight bucks, and we go through one about every couple of weeks. Most people have two, one in use and a spare, and when your tank in use runs out you start looking for the butane guy to replace it.

The butane guys come around every couple of days but most people work in the mornings and so we miss them, which is why Saturday is the big butane day. The guys drive these rattletrap old trucks piled high with these fireplug-size orange metal tanks which weigh a ton empty and two tons full. They wear these scruffy bright-orange jumpsuits, now rather a dull orange, and they park their truck down in the Plaza Rovira and spread out around the surrounding few blocks with dollies carrying five or six tanks. They bang a metal bar on the tanks to alert the neighborhood that it's butane time. When you hear the banging you go out on the balcony and yell down to the guy how many tanks you want and which apartment you live in. He brings what you've ordered up and exchanges his full tank for your empty one. His job really sucks because if your apartment building doesn't have an elevator, and many don't (ours dates from the '70s and has one), he has to carry the full tank up the stairs and the empty one down. Also, he's probably an Arab or Pakistani illegal immigrant working for tips. The tank is eight euros so I just give the guy ten. He needs the cash more than I do.

Our hot-water heater and stove, like most people's, are hooked up to natural gas, but some people use butane tanks to power them, too. Our last apartment was like that. We went through at least a tank a week, and if we missed the butane guy, we were screwed. My understanding is that in interior Spain and the north coast people generally do have central heating, but along the Mediterranean coast it's rare. Air-conditioning is pretty rare, too, because you really need it only about two weeks out of the year, in August, and we're often gone in August anyway, either to the US or someplace nice and cool like the Pyrenees or the north coast. We also spend a good many summer weekends in Remei's tiny hometown of Vallfogona de Riucorb, where they have a big old stone house that's wonderfully cool inside, where there's a very nice municipal swimming pool with full bar service--the only rule is that you get your drink in a plastic glass, they don't allow real glass in the pool area--and where it's dry and hot, therefore tolerable, during the day, but breezy and cool at night. Air-conditioning is becoming more and more common in Barcelona since it's cheap to install and people don't run it very much. We're not going to get it since we don't need it. I will admit, though, that while I am a vegetarian, I have been known to go over to the McDonald's over on Mayor de Gràcia, the only fast-food joint in the neighborhood, and order a Coke, just to sit in the A/C for half an hour or so.

Posted 18:23 by John

Breaking News: Televisión Española is reporting that Jesús Gil, flamboyant multimillionaire owner of the Atlético de Madrid soccer team and former mayor of the Eurotrash resort town of Marbella, has been sentenced to 3 1/2 years in prison for embezzlement and fraud in the "caso Atlético". Two of Gil's co-conspirators received prison sentences as well. Gil and his minions apparently squeezed the club dry after he assumed the club's presidency in 1992. Among other shenanigans, Gil, as mayor of Marbella, made a deal with himself, president of the Atlético de Madrid soccer club, that the town of Marbella would pay the Atlético de Madrid in exchange for the players' wearing an advertisement promoting Marbella on their shirts. God knows how much money got suctioned out of various people's pockets as part of that deal. In the early '90s, Gil also conspired with his players to pay them large sums of money "tax-free" under the table. I can't believe that none of the players went to jail--hell, one of them, Paolo Futre, is now the general manager of the team (director deportivo). Futre was famous as one of the few players who smoked; another was Prosinecki. Another thing he did that was illegal was to buy 95% of the club's shares in exchange for assuming its enormous debt, which he never paid a penny of. Part of the sentence against Gil is that he has to give up his shares, which he will be free to bid for when they are sold, and another part is that he will actually have to pay the debt he promised he would. It's really a pretty harsh sentence. The problem, of course, is that Gil is going to appeal it. The case has been going on since 1999, and this sentence will not go into effect until Gil's appeal gets turned down, assuming that the often horribly incompetent and occasionally corrupt Spanish judiciary turns it down.

For the first time ever, I am going to try to launch an Internet campaign. I would like my esteemed co-blogger "Jesús Gil" from Ibidem to change his web handle. He is a loyal fan of Atlético de Madrid, which he has every right to be, but he could find a more socially responsible fellow than Jesús Gil to name himself after. Not one to criticize without proposing remedies, I suggest former Atlético player and current coach Luis Aragonés, admired by everyone in the world of Spanish soccer and beloved by Atlético fans, as a worthy replacement. Luis Aragonés is someone like Yogi Berra or Phil Rizzuto with the Yankees, a real lifetime supporter of his team. Jesús Gil is like a combination of George Steinbrenner and Marc Cuban and Jerry Jones, squared. Come on, people, make your voices known on this critical issue.

The system under which Spanish soccer clubs operate is actually a great deal more free-market than the American sports systems. Some of the most important differences are:

1) Spanish clubs are historically nonprofit, social organizations. They have historically been governed by their members, who vote to elect the club president, who in turn hires the general manager and coach and is the boss. Club presidents are known for interfering with the professionals and especially for firing coaches left and right. One year Atlético had something like five coaches. Last year Español had three coaches and this year they're on their second. Anyway, early in the '90s all the clubs got way over their heads in debt, and only Real Madrid, Barcelona, Athletic Bilbao, and Osasuna of Pamplona were able to clean up their finances and maintain the old regime. All the others had to go private, selling to owners, who now function as club presidents. They all hold absolute power over their clubs, and some, like the guy who used to run Sevilla (González de Caldas?), have abused their power. The Sevilla guy used club money to spend on his model girlfriend (= high-priced prostitute) Sofia Mazagatos while the team was sliding toward Second Division.

2) There is no salary cap. Teams are free to wheel and deal with players' contracts, and they do. Players are bought and sold for cash. There is no draft. Clubs are divided into various divisions, in Spain First (20 teams), Second A (22 teams), Second B (80 teams), and Third (a lot of teams, at least a couple of hundred). First Division clubs range in size, wealth, and power from FC Barcelona and Real Madrid, as big and rich and tradition-packed as major US franchises as the Yankees or Cowboys or Niners or whatever, to several clubs at the bottom that operate at a Triple A level or so. In Spain, at the end of every season, the bottom three teams in First drop down to Second, and the top three teams in Second go up to First. This makes the season exciting down to the wire. The lower-division clubs are not controlled by the First Division clubs in an American-style farm system; they are independent units, and they hope to win their division and to move up.

3) The teams play in two different competitions. One is the League, in which every First Division team plays each other one home and away and whoever comes in first wins, no playoffs or anything. The top six teams, in Spain, go on to play in Europe-wide competitions the next year. Teams that play in Europe receive lots of TV money that they keep for themselves. The second is the Cup, in which teams from First, Second, and Second B play a knockout, playoff-style competition. The Cup winner also plays in Europe the next year.

4) There's advertising all over the place. Barça makes a big deal about how they haven't cheapened themselves by selling advertising on their shirts. Everybody else does, and Barça's stupid pride is costing them ten million euros or so a year.

Posted 15:50 by John

The Vanguardia's lead headline today is "Bush demands that UN obey him". There's impartiality for you. Bush did say that if the UN wimps out it will become an "ineffective and irrelevant debating society". Well? It will. If the Americans have to act against the UN's wishes, they will do so, and the UN will then be revealed to be as powerless as the old League of Nations was. Colin Powell is leaning on the French, Russian, and Chinese foreign ministers in New York right about now. There's not really much news on the international diplomatic front, or on the domestic political front, either. The media seems to be waiting suspensefully for today's Hans Blix report.

Posted 01:20 by John

Here's a lovely piece of Chomsky-bashing from Front Page.

Posted 00:25 by John

Reports that a Spanish judge had freed the alleged Al Qaeda members arrested a couple of weeks ago here in Barcelona jumped the gun a little; they will be held at least for another week while more evidence is presented against them......The high school kids cut class and had an antiwar demo today downtown; five of them got themselves arrested. Cool. Of course their mommies and daddies won't let anything happen to them. Get this, on March 5 they've called a nationwide high-school students' strike against the war. What kind of turnout do you think they're going to get? If I were a high-school teacher I'd schedule a major exam for that day. No makeups. Miss it, get a zero......It is starting to look like little time will be wasted fooling around before the invasion of Iraq. Wanna bet they introduce a Security Council resolution tomorrow after Hans Blix tells them that Saddam still isn't cooperating? Rumor has it that Condi Rice is leaning on Blix big-time; she went to see him Tuesday. Colin Powell is accusing the Weasels of "delaying", "diverting attention", and "getting Iraq off the hook". That's pretty strong language. I think he means it. Even Powell is disgusted by the Weasels. The Reichsminister to the UN said the Reich was backing Paris on a proposal for more inspections that will be made tomorrow, if the French ambassador has the gall to propose it after Blix's second report......Spanish TV is reporting that Americans are panicking in craven fear. Now, now. Stocking up on bottled water does not a panic make. If café chat is any sign, and I'm fairly well tuned in on the café-chat radar, people here in Barcelona are a bit concerned about what might happen, but I wouldn't call it a panic. I doubt things are too much different in Kansas City......I still think the alleged Bin Laden tape is phony, though I will admit it might have been some sort of montage using his voice; they must have thousands of Bin Laden tapes out there they could edit together......Aznar met with Reichskanzler Schröder. They didn't call one another poopheads, but they strongly disagreed publicly on the war......The Vangua is making a very big deal about the Pope's envoy in Baghdad......Mexico and Chile will probably back a US resolution in the Security Council, though they don't dig preventive war. They dig the concept of multilateralism more than they don't dig preventive war, however......There is talk that our very own major-league terrorist gang, ETA, was behind that last FARC bombing in Bogotá that killed 35 people in a nightclub. There is all kinds of evidence of an ETA-FARC connection......Baltasar Porcel says that American arrogance has always been intolerable......A fourth large Barcelona chain of English-language academies, Cambridge School, has gone down, closing 13 centers and leaving nine thousand students in the street with courses paid for in advance through bank loans. This is turning out to be a major consumer fraud. English-teacher unemployment is through the roof, since with Opening, Brighton, Oxford, and now Cambridge down, and with Wall Street having closed down half its centers, about 500 people have been thrown out of work since September 2002 when Opening crashed. The talk among local English teachers is that times are tough, and I have heard that several people have gone back to England......Perhaps the biggest news of the day here in Barcelona is that Fútbol Club Barcelona president Joan Gaspart has resigned effective immediately and has been replaced by Enric Reyna. This is a major Convergence and Union coup, since their men have taken over the organization of the club to the detriment of Gaspart and his predecessor, José Luis Nuñez, both of whom are strong PP sympathizers. Watch Barça become much more stridently Catalan nationalist.

Posted 15:51 by John

The Tripartite Axis of Weasels is holding out in NATO, unwilling to cave in to the pressure of the other sixteen nations to prepare to defend Turkey, which has formally invoked Article Four for the first time ever. That means that all other NATO member states are required to participate in consultations. France, Belgium, Germany, the Vatican, and the EU are not going to help "the U.S. and its fifteen loyal allies", which would be Canada, Iceland, Norway, Denmark, Holland, Luxembourg, Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Greece, Turkey itself, Spain, Portugal, Italy, and the UK, to protect Turkey. Admittedly, Turkey is already under American protection, and it also has the second largest military in NATO, with 700,000 troops including a 50,000-man rapid reaction force which can be ready to move in a few hours and three mobile infantry divisions (not already committed to any of Turkey's frontiers) in reserve, plenty of attack helicopters, about 1000 M-60 main battle tanks, and 164 F-16s and more than 200 other planes, mostly F-4s. Additionally, Turkish soldiers have the reputation of being tough and well-trained, unlike, say, the Belgians. The Turks could stomp Iraq on their own if they had to. The Turks, however, want reassurance that they will be supported internationally to pacify Turkish public opinion. Additional note: Turkey is friendly with Israel, and the two have been known to cooperate on international and military issues. The Economist has reported on this more than once.

Small note: Luxembourg has changed sides. They were originally going to go with the Weasels but flip-flopped. Outside the Weasels, it looks like the Dutch and Norwegians are on board with the Alliance.

An audiotape claimed to be from Osama Bin Laden appeared last night on Al-Jazeera. The Vanguardia's front-page lead headline is "Bin Laden asks for support for Iraq", and there is a quarter-page photo of Osama on page 4. I originally thought, until I read closely, that photo was new and that Osama was really alive; it's merely an old photo of Osama on a television screen saying "Al-Jazeera Exclusive". In the caption they tell you that photo is from the archives. The whole thing is intentionally misleading. First, there's not one whit of evidence that this tape is really from Osama. It's just an audiotape. So the headline is completely false because it lacks the word "Alleged". Second, the photo appears to be new. It isn't. Third, Osama is dead anyway, because if we didn't kill him his poor health did. Osama's kidneys didn't work, among other things, and he hadn't been able to get dialysis on the run. Fourth, the tape says that all Islam should defend Iraq. That's dumb. That's only going to get Iraq in worse trouble. It's like when the Ku Klux Klan endorses a candidate for election: no help.

Possibilities: 1) The tape is American disinformation aimed at showing there's a Bin Laden-Saddam connection. 2) The tape is some kind of Al Qaeda message to Osama's followers. 3) The tape is Al Qaeda disinformation aimed at sowing confusion. 4) The tape is Iraqi disinformation, a last-ditch effort at rallying worldwide radical Islam behind secular Saddam. 5) The tape really is Osama. I figure number two and number four are most likely, especially since the speaker on the tape refers to the Baath Party as Communists, but says that Islamists can nonetheless ally themselves with it. A good rule of thumb for sniffing out who's behind obvious propaganda is whether it includes a mild attack, rather beside the point, on somebody. That somebody is likely to be the source of the information, and he's included the mild attack to distract attention from himself. Saddam would never call himself a Communist, would he? Uh, yeah, he might, if there were an overriding purpose.

The French are all mad because they've been taking a bunch of flak in the American press. Le Monde is complaining about "Francophobia" in the States. The Vanguardia says that "Sectors of the (American) press and the diplomatic corps present a certain recurring vision of France as a country where anti-Semitism runs wild and synagogues burn every day." Uh, excuse me, but synagogues do occasionally burn and an awful lot of French folks voted for the anti-Semitic Le Pen in the last election. The French are concerned enough that they're sending a delegation to try to pacify American public opinion. Bet it don't take. Le Monde does say that the "virulent campaign" can be understood as "the answer of an America too frequently presented on this side of the Atlantic as a gang of trigger-happy cowboys ruled by a simplistic fundamentalist preacher." Uh, yeah. I can't get over this complaining about the United States finally speaking out, and loud, against the insults that have been continually sent our way over the last sixty years. When we finally get mad and respond, they act surprised and get mad themselves. Screw Old Europe.

Enric Juliana comments in the Vangua that "the Catholic Church has been subjected to a moral lynching in the United States". I've seen that line or something similar in several Vangua articles; the Vangua is Catholic and monarchist. No, the Catholic Church is suffering from a serious loss of credibility after too many Catholic priests were caught molesting the kiddies left in their care and too many bishops and cardinals who knew exactly what was going on were caught doing nothing to solve the problem, not punishing the guilty priests, allowing them to stay in positions where they had access to children, and generally covering up the whole thing. Anyone who thinks Richard Nixon's behavior regarding the Watergate scandal was immoral and despicable should think that this behavior is a hundred times worse, since Nixon covered up some insignificant political dirty tricks and the Catholic hierarchy covered up for repeat, pathological child-molesters. This is not a case of one poor, confused guy who once did something he shouldn't have. This is a case of MANY active pederasts with a pattern of behavior who were protected from the law, and even from punishment within the Church. Moral lynching, my ass. The American Catholic Church committed moral suicide.

There is certain resentment in Spain, and perhaps particularly in Catalonia, toward the United States on the part of Catholic intellectuals, I'm not sure why. Some of it must be because the US is majority Protestant, though the Catholics are the largest single religious group there, and because many US Protestants were openly anti-Catholic bigots until about the time of World War II. Some of the rest, though, is based on a traditionalist dislike of modernity and change, which the United States symbolizes in Spain. And there's a good part due to the liberation-theology leftism that reigns among much of the hierarchy, and there's another good part in Catalonia due to the fact that the section of the Catalan Church based at Montserrat is ultra-Catalanist and therefore anti-anythingelseist. (If you're looking for the Spanish Catholics in Catalonia, try Poblet.) Enric Juliana says, "...the unipolar new order could be a much more dangerous threat (than Communism) to Christianity in the long run: a slow but inexorable dissolution...Catholicism is the only "international movement"...capable of planting a strong moral objection to the "new order"." Gee, I thought the usual European criticism of America was that it was run by a bunch of religious nuts. But a religious European, Enric Juliana, says we're going to destroy the Catholic Church and that we're more dangerous to Christianity than the Communists. Looks like we can't win either way. Meanwhile, the Pope's emissary, French Cardinal Roger Etchegaray, is "praying for peace" in Baghdad.

The Iraqis have granted entrance visas to fifty "human shields". They will spread out to various neuralgic points in Baghdad. I'm nominating these guys right now for the 2003 Darwin Awards. I vote we pay no attention to their presence or absence when selecting military targets. I also vote we don't do anything more than we have to after the war to get them home alive if they're Allied citizens, and I vote we charge them with treason if war breaks out for giving aid and comfort to the enemy. If they're not citizens of an Alliance nation, I don't see why we should care whether they get out alive. And that goes double if they're French. I suppose basic Allied moral decency will prevent us from abandoning them to their fate, though.

The opposition parties in the Spanish Parliament called a vote that, if passed, would have tied the government's hands if a war breaks out and would have aligned Spain with the Weasels. It failed 151-175, with all the parties except Aznar's conservative PP voting in favor. Convergence and Union's Xavier Trias is trying to sit on the fence. He wants "public opinion to know we're working for peace" so that if war breaks out it will be because it was inevitable, "not just a whim", and that's why they voted in favor. Meanwhile, they're making noises about the peace march on the 15th; the manifesto says "Preventive war is a threat for the peace and the security of the world" and "(This is) an attempt to guarantee the control of the oil and to reorganize the region as a function of the political and economic interests of the United States." It stinks of anti-American conspiracy theory. Cándido Mendez of the Socialist labor union UGT said, "No blood for oil". Socialist leader José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero said, "Let's be responsible and stop the war". José María Fidalgo of the Communist union CCOO said, "We must defend different values and interests than the Bush Administration". And Gaspar Llamazares of the Communist United Left said, "Aznar is alone in the maze of the war and the American far right". Wimpo Artur Mas of Convergence and Union is going to cut short a visit to Quebec (the Catalan nationalists are always visiting Quebec) to come home and appear in the antiwar demo.

Mariano Rajoy of the PP blasted the Socialists, accusing them of having no principles and of trying to take advantage of the Iraq crisis for short-term political profit. He pointed to the repeated Socialist flip-flops on the issue; yesterday Zapatero admitted on TV that he was against the war personally but would accept it if there were another UN resolution. That's not much different from the official government position, and is distinctly contradictory to the strident antiwar posture the Socialists have been screaming out for months. Zapatero really is a weasel; he's trying to weasel out. He'll have a good old time shouting slogans at the demo and then support the war after it's over.

The Vangua published a Jimmy Carter op-ed. I didn't read it. But Quim Monzó notifies us that there is a website called Masturbate for Peace whose mission statement is "You can't love others if you don't love yourself. Evidently, masturbation is the greatest expression of self-esteem. So it is natural that we citizens of the world should unite to masturbate for peace." One of their slogans is "War is wrong, whack your schlong". Several people have written in explaining exactly how they will onanize for peace. In great detail. It is considered acceptable to self-pleasure either collectively or individually. Quim Monzó says, "I'm telling you this because the big demonstration will be next Saturday, the 15th, and it would be nice to see, in action, on the Paseo de Gràcia, the local members of this interesting movement."

Sadly, the Iberian lynx, the world's most endangered feline, is one step closer to extinction upon the death of a male who had been captured sick more than a year ago. They have to catch another male now for the breeding-in-captivity program, and it might be good if this one were healthy. There are between 160 and 200 Iberian lynxes alive in the Sierra Morena and the Doñana swamp, not enough to guarantee the survival of the species in the wild. Poaching, being hit by cars, tuberculosis, and the lack of rabbits are all factors in the decline of the species; the dead lynx had tuberculosis. There is a female at the Barcelona zoo. It's a beautiful animal, but the poor thing is locked in a tiny pen. They keep talking about greatly expanding the zoo, which would allow them to put the big cats in more appropriately-sized enclosures. But, anyway, if you ever come here check out the lynx at the zoo.

Posted 12:29 by John

Music Update: Check out KBON in Eunice, Louisiana, for some down-home Louisiana music ranging fron zydeco to two-step to swamp pop. This is a "people's" station that plays stuff the locals actually enjoy, so they throw in the occasional mainstream hit. This station is so cool that the DJs sometimes speak in Cajun French. Then there's an "aficionado's" station out of New Orleans called WWOZ that plays mostly jazz and blues. It's run by the New Orleans Tourist Board and is extremely professional. The blues shows rock, and the jazz shows play New Orleans jazz, not that "hard bop" stuff or whatever it is that jazz bores get off on so much. Both stations are highly recommended.

Just to piss off France, why don't American schools change their curriculum and teach Cajun French instead of Parisian French? That'd be great. Instead of "Voilà Monsieur Thibaut. Monsieur Thibaut habite la place d'Italie. Monsieur Thibaut aime beaucoup les allemands. Monsieur Thibaut n'aime pas les juifs. Le pére de Monsieur Thibaut était collaborateur. Sa mére et ses soeurs aussi, mais à la horizontale", we could learn to say, "Get away from my woman before I stab you with this broken-off whiskey bottle neck" or "Waitress, bring us three more pitchers of beer and some more crawfish and jambalaya" or "Let's get drunk and go gator huntin'." Much more patriotic, I think.

Posted 16:04 by John

Baltasar Porcel is on a roll! He's been to New York, or maybe he's still there. All New York readers, hunt him down and slap him silly. Anyway, he's been writing about his impressions. I've excerpted his columns from Saturday, Monday, and today.

...I must return to New York, where in the United Nations the face of the world is being decided...This does not interest the United States or Bush, a man educated by and a politician paid for by Texan oil, which wants to control the Iraqi deposits, second in the world in production. And with another plan hiding behind that: the oil won't last, while the water of the great rivers that cross Iraq is eternal and even more necessary so the Middle East can develop: whoever controls it rules.

I've spoken with two personalities who do not count among those who will decide the war, but do among those who are consulted about its probability. And they think we are facing an unavoidable warlike resolution if Saddam doesn't surrender or go, which he won't do. And they explain something mediatically key: CNN, specialized in sensationalism, is suffering a serious economic crisis which can only be palliated by war, which it has been preaching for more than a year...

Porcel then tells us he doesn't like New York except for its skyscrapers, that he ate badly as usual except in an Italian restaurant full of Mafiosos, that he went to Chinatown...

...among thousands of Chinese families, without any mixed couples visible. It's not in vain that Chinatown, which goes back to 1870, is the most numerous nucleus of this race outside China. How many people are there, and how many are illegal, in these shacks, basements, shops, multiplied in the dirty alleyways, that often inside are revealed as elaborate, mysterious, and wealthy mansions. Besides, one can buy quality fish, fruit, meat, vegetables, at reasonable prices; it's the only New York market not controlled by the Mafia, or that's run by the Chinese Mafia: the real sovereignty of Chinatown is greater than that of the Catalan statutory autonomy.

I also approach, in Williamsburg, the orthodox Jewish neighborhood, another hermetic and endogamic microcosmos with a rigid exterior. But its antennas are open to the entire world: does it constitute the greatest existent concentration of economic power per square meter? New York is, besides startling for visitors, the capital of Jewish power. Saddam Hussein will have a bad time.

...in the great bookstores of New York or in the airport there are the same books, though in different quantities. And with a particularity: they've all been written by American authors, whether a historical study, a tourist guide, or a fish-factory manual. Translations are only seen in the literary section: Isabel Allende, Proust, you can conut them on the fingers of one hand. The European bookstore, full of translations from many languages, one of the most absorbing spaces that exist, is impossible here: the country lives enclosed and euphorized within itself. It's not strange, then, that Bush, when he acceded to the presidency, had not traveled nor owned a passport, that mass blind psychoses happen, and that its foreign policy is as arrogant as it is ignorant.

Comments: 1) I don't know what bookstores Baltasar went to. Good ones do exist. Even in New York. 2) Mass blind psychoses? Is this, like, say, when Americans all got mad because three thousand of us got murdered at once? 3) He certainly has a vibrant imagination. 4) It's not the oil, it's the water! You heard it from Baltasar first. 5) The war is a CNN plot. You heard it from Baltasar's informants first. 6) The Orthodox Jews who live in Williamsburg are mysteriously wealthy and powerful...hey, Baltasar, you failed to footnote the Protocols of the Elders of Zion for that one. You're busted for plagiarism.

Posted 13:33 by John

Here's Cataloony and anti-Semite Xavier Bru de Sala on Catalonia and the war from today's Vanguardia. The article is titled "Catalan unity".

There are four days left and we can already predict that we will remember February 15 as a memorable date. The no to that war and the no to Aznar's servile position add to the effort of all our political parties (except one) to contribute to the symbolic and moral rupture of the Catalans with the position of the Spanish government. After the failure of Powell's proofs and the ridiculousness of the British secret services, the arguments offered to justify the attack on Iraq have collapsed. At the same time, the Bush Administration is pressing on the accelerator, to silence the European protests with the booming of the inevitable, calculating that once the attack has been launched we can only hope that the war will be short, that is, will go well for them and will be won soon. That's why it is crucial to raise our voices now. If the Barcelona demonstration is really massive, it will have a very notable resonance. For the first time in our democracy, Catalonia will stake its position in an international crisis in a forceful and united manner. For the first time, there will be Catalan unity against the Government and the Spanish official position on a serious matter. Possibly, slightly frightened by the importance of the demonstration, some Convergence and Union leaders will abstain from pressing on the organizational accelerator. In that case, they run the risk of being overwhelmed. You don't need much of a nose to smell the clamor.

Comments: 1) Check out that last mixed metaphor or whatever it is. 2) He sure likes that image of pressing on the accelerator. 3) He really thinks that some people outside Catalonia give a shit what the Catalans think about anything, as if you could say that the Catalans as a group think anything. 4) Like a typical obsessive nationalist, he can't look at any issue except through the lens of the relative prestige of his own group.

If there is (a clamor), Barcelona will become a moral reference for Europe. One of the few great European cities which are not capitals of states, the only one which boasts a strong democratic nationalism, demonstrates with all its leaders for peace and against the warlike posture of its country. If there is a massive attendance, this visualization of Catalonia as an entity with its own position is, besides being new, very important. The Europeans are against the attack on Iraq, with few differences despite the fact that the continent is artificially divided by the thoughtless servility of Aznar and Berlusconi.. If there's a possible echo chamber of this civil unity above its rulers, it is Barcelona. Catalonia's changing blocs and, in opposition to official Spain, but beside real Spain, moving to the European position, is much more transcendent on this occasion than having a little Foreign Ministry wandering around lost on the dance floor. The opposition to this war is ethical, because there are alternatives and it is not the last recourse. That's why, these days, it is an advantage and a motive of pride to mean nothing geopolitically. We Catalans are legitimated in going out to the street in defense of these values, becuase in our case they are not contaminated by unedifying national interests. The opportunity to be the civil capital of the ethical no is unique.

Comments: 1) He really does think non-Catalans give a crap whether there's a demo aganist the war here in Barcelona or not. 2) 57% of the citizens of the EU are in favor of an attack on Iraq if the UN approves. That figure drops to 45% in Spain. But if we assume that all of those 45% of Spaniards will vote for the PP in the next election, that's enough to pull another absolute majority in Parliament. Anyway, there is no European majority against the war, since that pro-war 57%, remember, includes only EU citizens and doesn't count the Eastern Europeans, who can be safely assumed to be even more pro-war. 3) Notice the self-congratulatory tone throughout. An American who is as nationalist as Bru de Sala would be called a chauvinistic bigot. The ethical capital of Europe, my ass. Tell that to the shortchanging taxi drivers, the con men openly working the streets, and the municipal cops drinking carajillos in the bars, not to mention the self-admittedly dishonest newspapers. 4) What lack of unsavory national interests? Your whole point in this article, dude, is that it's in Catalonia's "national interest" to unite in opposition to the war so everybody will say how moral and ethical y'all are. 5) Bru de Sala forgets, throughout his piece, that Aznar is the Prime Minister because, like, the people of Spain voted for him. And gave him a landslide victory with an absolute Parliamentary majority. It was in 2000. Remember?

Internally, it's also transcendental. A demonstration in Seville, for example, would be just as much of the opposition as one in Madrid. They would be discounted and absorbed by the political sphere. A demonstration of the Catalans, with Pujol, Maragall, Mas, and Clos at the head of a crowd, has an authentic civic and unitary character, since it represents not only the near-complete totality of the parliamentary (ideological) range but also the spirit of an advanced people that is against, due to historical suffering, unilateral impositions. There is no doubt that the Left is wholeheartedly preparing. It would be unpardonable for CiU, once its leaders have joined the manifestation with total clarity, to just go along, as if it only wanted to appear in the photos, instead of pulling along its people to join the demonstration. The civic unity would be the same, except that nationalism will also be in the game. If, for living up to its beliefs, Convergence and Union is punished by the PP, everyone will understand that, in addition to joining in a grave American error, Aznar is vengeful. If it fails us Saturday, Convergence and Union will also have failed Catalonia.

Comments: 1) What about the 15% of Catalans who vote PP? They don't count within Catalan unity, too? Or is it that they're Uncle Toms, not really Catalans? 2) You do know, Mr. Bru de Sala, that Pujol has come out in favor of the war if there's UN approval, don't you, and that Mas will do whatever Pujol tells him to? Convergence and Union's leaders have already announced that they are pro-alliance. Agreed, most Convergence voters probably aren't, and the party itself is co-sponsoring the demo on the 15th. That's CiU trying to sit on both sides of the fence on this one. They're Mugwumps--"with their mugs on one side of the fence and their wumps on the other". 3) Nice to know you've anointed the Catalans with the title of "an advanced people". All I can say is you don't know my in-laws. They're pretty primitive. My mother-in-law makes her own soap. Hell, she used to kill her own pigs. Got too old for that.

Posted 12:23 by John

The Axis of Weasels put in their objections in writing to the US request for NATO to prepare a defense plan for NATO member Turkey in case of attack. (Remember, this NATO crisis and the UN Security Council resolutions are completely different things.) That blocks the US motion, so Turkey is going to invoke Article Four for the first time in NATO history, saying that it considers that Iraq poses a threat to Turkey's "territorial integrity, political independence, or security". This would require NATO to hold consultations on defending its member Turkey.

The Vanguardia publishes a misleading map today, showing that the people of all European countries are against "an American military intervention without formal UN approval", according to a survey. The Brits are against it 68%-29%, the French against it 86%-12%, and the Spaniards 77%-16%. However, they are honest enough to mention that the survey was taken in January, before Powell's February sppech to the UN. They are not honest enough to present the results of the question of whether people would support a UN-approved American intervention; as we said several days ago, majorities in almost all European countries would. So you can't say the Europeans are anti-war at all, though it would be fair to say that the Europeans are anti-American-unilateralism.

Bush said that he was "disappointed in France" and that he "doesn't understand" the French attitude impeding NATO from helping Turkey prepare to defend itself. Rummy said that the Weasels' attitude is "an error" and that we're all ready to fight and don't need them; their opposition "will not delay" plans for an attack, and the US and other allies will give Turkey all the protection that it needs. Powell said the Weasels were ignoring their duty toward Turkey. USA Today, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, and the New York Post all called the Weasels a bunch of poopheads, and I bet they all got an earful of a leak from somebody like Paul Wolfowitz; the American press is getting mad at Paris, Brussels, and Berlin. Even Mary McGrory is for a war now. This all adds up to a full-blast diplomatic offensive aimed straight at the Weasels. Let's see if it brings them into line because time is running out. It may not because it's starting to look more and more like the Russians have sold out to the French and Germans, and that's added to their bravado. Chirac said, at the unveiling of yet another official declaration, this one with the Rooskies, "Nothing today justifies a war". Here at Iberian Notes we're sticking to our prediction of war before Feb. 18, and if the French don't think it's justified, I guess that'll be just too bad.

The PP government in Madrid has announced that it's beginning a domestic public relations campaign; the message will be that they are not enthusiastic about going to war but are interested in secure and stable peace, for which the neutralization of Saddam is necessary. Zapatero, the leader of the Socialist opposition, said, "The French and German proposals are a much more solid hope for peace and to disarm Saddam Hussein than the permanent warlike interests of the Bush Administration". He is worried because "Aznar is alone in his support for those who want a warlike attack and a war", so Aznar should change his position and align Spain with France and Germany. Finally, he said that the demonstrations called for February 15 were "a ray of hope for peace" because they will support "reasonable and effective proposals, directed by the United Nations and not by an Administration, no matter how powerful it is, like Mr. Bush's." He didn't enumerate any of those reasonable and effective proposals.

One thing about Spanish politics is that it involves a lot of posturing, even more so than politics in other places. In the States, at least some of a political campaign is centered on the candidates' voting records and publicly taken positions, and at least some more of it consists of the candidates unveiling plans for what they'll do if elected. Those plans, in America, are always specific. They say, "Here's where we'll get the money and here's exactly how we plan to spend it". How many times during political campaigns have you seen stories headlined "Bush's (or Clinton's, or Gore's) numbers don't add up"? I, at least, have seen plenty. You never see those stories in Spain. Candidates normally make huge general pronouncements like "We'll create 800,000 jobs and build 150,000 housing units" without ever bothering to explain how. I think this is taken as a sign of good intentions, not as a specific promise to actually do anything, since nobody ever challenges these outlandish promises. This is why Zapatero can get away with his argumentation on the war, which is simply not realistic. He's a blowhard safely taking an easy posture, against war and for peace; he's not looking at the options that Spain actually has on the table before it. Everyone, including he himself, knows that the position he is taking is already doomed to failure. But he's posturing appropriately and that's what counts.

We suppose we'd better make clear that Zapatero's position is that of most people in Spain on this issue. Only 45% of Spaniards are in favor of the war, and that's with a UN resolution. Most of them are knee-jerk anti-American on foreign policy--well, just plain anti-American. The Aznar government is sticking its neck out on this one, taking a generally unpopular position and suffering a lot of criticism. The Spanish movie-star brigade are making lots of "No War" noises. A bunch of asshole college kids, who are as a rule intolerably snotty when they get political, booed Josep Piqué, the Catalan PP leader and cabinet minister, at the Universitat Pompeu Fabra. They shouted, "Piqué, fascist, you're the terrorist". (It rhymes in Spanish; it's a variant of an ETA slogan.) I used to teach English at the Pompeu; they're all rich kids, lazy bastards who think they don't really have to do any work and think they're superior to their teacher because he can't afford the designer clothes they wear. They're all majoring in some crap like labor relations or public relations.

(The Spanish students I liked best were the engineers and computer tech guys at the Polytechnic. They were very nice, all smart, hardworking, and clear-thinking. OK, maybe kind of geeky, but I tend to get along pretty well with geeks. For some reason. And they were studying English because they actually wanted to use the language.)

Posted 22:29 by John

Well, the Barça, in its first game under new coach Radomir Antic, tied Athletic Bilbao 2-2 here in the Camp Nou. When Antic took over he said something like this to the team, "Look, you guys are in lousy physical condition, and you're all confused because you've been watching way too many tactical videos instead of working out. I'm going to play the guys who are the most experienced because we're under pressure to win, and we're especially going to be tough on defense, work the ball down the sides and center, and practice strategy plays off corners and free kicks since more than 50% of goals are scored on them. Forget all that crap Van Gaal told you and instead look for the counterattack every time you get the ball back. And I'm going to run you guys hard in practice until two days before a game."

Anyway, in the first half Barcelona played like that's what he'd told them and it was great. Antic put in a defense of Bonano in goal, and Reiziger, Puyol, De Boer, and Sorín as the back four. Xavi and Cocu played together as a double pivot, with Overmars out on the right and Mendieta on the left and Saviola and Kluivert up front. Sorín is a pretty good player, and Reiziger looks better when he's playing in his correct position. Overmars is looking better and better; he shredded Athletic's defense through the first half, centering to Saviola's head early for the first goal and then running away with the ball on a fast break, crossing up the goalie. They had several more chances and in general looked like a very good soccer team.

Then came the second half, and right off the bat Sorín committed a penalty that Ezquerro converted for Athletic, and just a few minutes later a confused melee in the area turned into the second Athletic goal. Barça lost its confidence and began to play like usual, and there was no hope of a comeback by about minute 70 Antic put in Riquelme for Mendieta, who had another lousy game; Riquelme wasn't any better. Kluivert muffed a couple of chances as usual. But at least the Barça got a point out of it. It's been a while since we got a point. Barcelona is now in fifteenth place with 24 points, and next week comes the big crosstown derby with resurgent Español, which has begun to play quite well under coach Javier Clemente; they pulled out a 0-0 tie with league leaders Real Sociedad in San Sebastián last night. A Barça loss would be extremely demoralizing and could knock them back as far as 18th place, in the relegation zone.

Most likely the top four teams in the League will go to the Champions' League next year, and the fifth and sixth will go to the UEFA Cup. In addition, the winner of the Spanish Cup gets a UEFA slot; should Depor, the only really good team still alive in the Spanish Cup, win it, then the second-place team goes to the UEFA. Barcelona, of course, got knocked out of the Spanish Cup by some third-division squad in the first round. Real Sociedad is still holding onto first place with 44 points and Real Madrid is right behind them with 42. Valencia has 39, Deportivo 36, and Celta and Betis 33 each. Barca is nine points out of a UEFA spot with seventeen games left to go. Theoretically they could make it into UEFA territory, but they'd have to go on a serious winning streak and hope somebody ahead of them chokes.

Posted 21:55 by John

Nobody on either side of the Atlantic is taking seriously the Franco-German proposal of tripling the number of inspectors in Iraq and sending in UN peacekeeping troops to protect them. Powell and Rice put the kibosh on it right away, calling it "a distraction, not a solution." That is, they openly accused the French and Germans of being full of shit, of not putting forward a serious plan but wasting time. Meanwhile, the Axis of Weasels has convinced the Belgians, their equivalent of Italy in the Rome-Berlin-Tokyo Axis, to put in the necessary objection in writing to the NATO military plan to aid Turkey. Says Louis Michel, Belgian foreign minister, "We're going to block the NATO action and use our right to veto." Go right ahead and rupture NATO, guys, and while you're at it wreck the UN too. It doesn't matter much to me, but if y'all force the Americans to act outside those organizations, they both will lose what little moral authority they still have.

How many Belgians does it take to change a lightbulb?
Only one, but first he has to kiss Schröder's ass and suck Chir...oh, well, never mind.

There's a rumor out that this week either the Americans or British will put up a resolution in the Security Council that would give Saddam a 48-hour ultimatum to stop being bolshy. The Vangua got a quick interview with John McCain in Munich; he's behind the Bush Administration on Iraq. He points out that as far as sending UN "blue helmets" there, look what happened in Srebrenica. He warns the French and Germans that they stand a good chance of being diplomatically isolated and that their attitude will damage European-US relations, though the fundamental relationship will continue. Russia's holding out for more and is threatening to line up with the Weasels on the Security Council; Putin's even bragging that he's got the Chinese behind them. I bet he doesn't. Screw the Russians.

The Vatican is rather fruitlessly trying to play international politics; they've sent all-purpose envoy, French Cardinal Roger Etchegaray, to Baghdad as the pope's "special agent" with a message for Saddam. Etchegaray is one of the "peace and justice" elements in the Vatican hierarchy. It's Old Latin Europe that's running the Catholic Church, folks, just like it's a bunch of academic left moral cowards running the mainstream US Protestant denominations.

Jordi Pujol is publicly criticizing his own Convergence and Union party for joining the February 15 demonstration against the war in Iraq. Oh, come on, as if Pujol didn't personally approve everything important his party does. This is just a way to get themselves on both sides of the issue: they'll look both moral for being against the war, but smart and realistic for understanding that the national interest implies supporting the United States. That's the spin they'll try to put on it, anyway. Pujol also said that his biggest regret is having opposed the 1986 referendum on whether Spain should be in NATO, which is an elegant way of defusing an issue of inconsistency that the Socialists would have loved to fling in his face.

Posted 13:43 by John

Well, it's time for the annual State of the Blog address. That's right, Inside Europe: Iberian Notes had its first birthday on February 8. We started off on our old, unlamented Homestead site on Feb. 8, 2002, and switched over to Blogger at the beginning of November. Patrick Crozier of Transport Blog helped us with the technical details of getting the new site set up. We had around 6700 page views in December and about 8200 in January, giving us around 59,000 page views on the two sites through January 31.

We've been blogrolled by such heavy hitters as InstaPundit and Little Green Footballs, as well as by many other quality blogs, including (just a few) Dr. Weevil, Samizdata, Silflay Hraka, Ibidem, Cinderella Bloggerfeller, Craig Schamp, Travelling Shoes, and Buscaraons. We're so cool that Andrew Sullivan linked to us once. We also think we've been partially influential in the founding of several other European-American blogs, which we're proud of.

Enough patting ourselves on the back. What does the future hold for Iberian Notes? First, a rededication to discussing all things Spanish. We've been talking about the war almost exclusively for the past couple of weeks; we've been trying to fill you in on Spanish government actions and popular attitudes, but we've been stuck on that subject for a while. I guess that's the main thing people are thinking about now. Second, no attempts to change style or attitude. I think my stuff works best when it's just me talking instead of when I put on airs, so I'm just going to be myself and not worry about whether I'm too extremist (Me? Too extremist? You wanna see extremist, buddy, I can show you extremist) or too impolite or too opinionated. Third, I'm afraid, no Antonio for the foreseeable future. He's taking care of his mom. I saw him last week and I'll see him tomorrow, and some of the things I've written are things I discussed with him, but he'll contribute again when he's good and ready and not busy or stressed. Fourth, I have no plans to stop blogging anytime soon.

Here's a limerick we wrote for our first month's commemoration:

As bloggers we now have a chance
To go public with all of our rants
The blog doesn't feed us
The people don't read us
But at least we can make fun of France.

Posted 14:19 by John

The Vanguardia is making a very big deal about the Pope's antiwar stance. Their lead editorial, however, points out, "What would have happened if the English and the French had listened to Pius XII and not declared war on Hitler?" Good question, that. Anyway, Tareq Aziz, of all people steeped in sin, Saddam's Ribbentrop, gets to visit the Pope next Friday. Assuming he's still alive. Aziz, by the way, is a Christian. Or claims to be one. "Member of the Christian, as opposed to Muslim, socioethnic group" might be the best description of Mr. Aziz. Let's see if the Pope can get him to see the error of his ways. Bet it don't take.

Gearhead and Jockitch are still being bolshy and Rumsfeld sentenced, "War is the last recourse, but we've tried diplomacy, sanctions, control of the no-fly zones in Iraq, and they didn't work." He also directly warned Paris and Berlin that they run the risk of isolation. The Vangua says we have 110,000 troops in the area, and the British have 1200 in the area and more than 40,000 more, including their Ark Royal aircraft carrier group, on the way. The Aussies have two carrier groups there, the Darwin and the Anzac, and 500 ground troops. The Bulgarians and Czechs are sending special bacteriological clean-up teams. We Americans damn well had better be grateful to our allies when this is all over. Confusingly, the French will commit a squadron of 40 transport planes should they line up with the rest of the alliance. Screw the French. If they line up with us it won't be because they want to, it'll be because they were too chicken not to.

No real news on the ETA killing. The town, Andoain, where the killing happened, is evidently the residence of a whole bunch of goddamn terrorist sympathizers and wannabes. A local journalist, José Luis López de Lacalle, another Socialist--the just-murdered police chief, Pagazaurtundua, held a Party card and was also a member of the UGT, the Socialist union, as well as an anti-ETA activist, a member of ¡Basta Ya! (Enough Already!)--was murdered in May 2000, and the Socialists on the City Council have had their houses attacked and their cars torched. Now, I'm no Socialist-lover, but the Socialists have enough backbone to stand up to ETA. It takes a pair of brass balls to be a Socialist activist or open sympathizer in the Basque Country, because they are targets, even Council members in tiny towns. You have to give them credit for that. Their official statement reads, "The Basque Country is the only place in Europe where people are still killed because of ideas, where ideological cleansing, and the physical elimination of all those who dare to raise their voices to denounce the situation in which we live, takes place." That's the way to talk. I wish I had that kind of guts. I really hate the ETA.

The Spanish government is leaking to the domestic press that Aznar is taking his pro-US position because he sees the US as looking to dominate the Middle East and he believes that it's smart to be on the winning side, that it's in Spain's national interest; that allying with America will bring Spain more importance in the world; and that America will owe Spain a favor should Spain ever need one. Aznar doesn't trust his European "friends", continues the leak, as he remembers French backing for Morocco in the Isla Perejíl mini-crisis during last summer. The Government considers it important to pacify public opinion, and is really hoping for a second UN resolution declaring open season on Iraq; if so, the governing PP will look like they were right all along and the Socialists will look dumb. This leak obviously comes either from Aznar personally or from somebody very high-up--Rodrigo Rato is a pretty smooth politician, for example--and is a preparation for winning back popular support on the issue of the war. It makes Aznar look like a smart guy, pulling strings to get benefits for Spain, being a realist, looking out for the national interest, and making the best deal he can get. That's an spin people around here will love--Aznar is so smart that he's outwitted the Yanquies! I hope it works, and I'm sure that it is at least partly true. The other part is Aznar's genuine ideological alignment with the Bush Administration. And a third part is probably Aznar's sheer joy at doing anything that makes the Socialists look dumb--admittedly, the Socialists aren't exactly first division competition, but he takes the pleasure out of it that he can. That's why I like the guy. He enjoys baiting Socialists.

Aitana Sánchez-Gijón, from the movie-stars-against-the-war people, is complaining that the government has censored her. Apparently, what they did was criticize her and her pals for turning the Goya movie awards show into a circus. That, you see, is censorship, at least in Aitana's Garofalo-sized brain. Perhaps we could use Garofalos as a standard of measurement for intelligence. You know, "Oh, Almodóvar's no dummy, though his movies are kind of absurd. He's at least six or seven Garofalos smart, though he's only about five feet tall." Aitana Sánchez-Gijón is about half a Garofalo smart or so. Penélope Cruz is at least two Garofalos smart, since she figured out that by covering up for Tom Cruise she could get Hollywood rich-and-famous. However, she's not smart enough to have checked with Tom about their official position on the war on Iraq, since he says he's for it and he's a big fan of Bush, while she showed up with a "No War!" sticker on her aesthetically-pleasing right boob at the Goya Awards. Oh, gee, maybe she got confused and thought Tom was saying "Yes" when he was really saying "Chess", his planned new musical foray onto the Broadway stage. Her English still isn't too good. Antonio Banderas is only about a Garofalo-and-a-half smart, since he made it over to America just fine, shacked up with the obligatory fading starlet, but then chose only absolutely horrendous roles in bomb movies. If you're still reading it can be plausibly argued either that your intelligence is at least fifteen or so Garofalos, because you are capable of absorbing my complex thought, or that your intelligence is about a fifteenth of a Garofalo, because you don't comprehend that my thought is really rather more, say, banal, than complex.

This guy is about a quarter of a Garofalo smart. He's Steve Nash, Canadian point guard for the Dallas Mavericks. He said that the war on Iraq would "be a serious mistake and would have incredible consequences, not only in the Middle East but also in the US. In the American Constitution it says that war can only be used in case of necessity or self-defense." Well, Steevo, first, I checked the Constitution and it says no such thing. Second, it can easily be argued that this is a case of both necessity and self-defense, anyway. And third, Steevo, you're a pro athlete. In Dallas. They're going to hang your Canadian ass off one of those basketball goals, Steevo. You better start running now.

Posted 12:27 by John

You know you're an Old European...

if you see no contradiction between your Socialist Party card and your new BMW.
if you put on high heels and a skirt to go down to the corner and buy bread.
if there's a strange receptacle nobody uses in your bathroom.
if you call a burger and fries steak haché avec pommes frites and then slather it with mayonnaise and sugary ketchup.
if you're not racist. Except for gypsies. And Arabs. And Turks. And Jews.
if you own black bikini underwear. And you're a man.
if you wear cologne because you shower every third day.
if, when visiting New York, you go on a bus tour of Harlem and then tell everyone back home about how authentic it was.
if you complain about "American health puritanism" when they ban smoking in the subway.
if you believe in multiculturalism and diversity except in your own arrondissement, which simply wouldn't do.
if you think drinking Orangina rather than Coke is somehow a protest against imperialism.
if you cross the street rather than pass in front of a McDonald's just so nobody will think you're entering or leaving.
if you brag about your country's millenarian artistic treasures, none of which you have ever seen.
if you make a big deal about rooting for a Third World team in the World Cup.
if dogs are welcome in the local café, bistro, or estaminet, but Arabs aren't.
if you own a T-shirt that says, "100% AMERICAN BOYS BASBALL FINEST QALITY PRODUCT."
if you place your cell phone on the table beside your silverware when you sit down in a restaurant.
if you're proud of your country's immensely long history but can't name more than three of its kings or queens.
if you've ever discussed the postmodern metasthesis of the semiotics of bike racing.
if you actually like anise liqueur, especially at five o'clock in the morning before mucking out the pig shed.
if you drive your rattletrap Renault eighty miles an hour down one-lane roads but won't visit the US because it's "dangerous".
if you spent a week visiting Tuzla in '94 and have used it to pick up on impressionable chicks ever since.
if you claim that you were in Paris in May '68, even if you were minus three years old.
if all your clothes are black. Or gray.
if you actually like tripe, paté, and blood sausage--for breakfast.
if you call getting hammered in the same bar every night "pub culture".
if you think that war is historically unjust unless your country won, in which case it's hard to see how they could have done anything else.
if you're still giving America crap about Vietnam when your country started the whole thing.
if you ever thought David Hasselhoff was a big star, or if you still think Pamela Anderson is one.
if you don't put tomato sauce on pizza, but do put fried eggs on top.
if you're still a virgin at twenty-three because you live with your parents and don't have a car.
if you pretend to enjoy street exhibitions of people wearing ugly old-fashioned clothes hopping around in an ungainly manner.
if you think Johnny Hallyday plays good rock'n'roll.
if you don't know how to swim.
if you spent two thousand bucks for breast / hair implants but won't spend two hundred bucks to get your teeth fixed.
if you don't see what's tasteless about painting yourself up in blackface.

Posted 11:23 by John

For years I have been nagged by this doubt. I attended both J.J. Pearce High School in Richardson, Texas, and Shawnee Mission South High School in Overland Park, Kansas. At Pearce, members of the school band were called "B.Q.s", which was the abbreviation for "Band Queers", while at South they were called "B.F.s", which stood for "Band Fags". Which usage is correct? Or is this a question of regional dialectology?

Posted 20:54 by John

Breaking News

ETA has killed again. A gunman murdered the chief of the municipal police in Andoain, near San Sebastián. The victim, Joseba Pagazaurtundia, was shot three times this morning in a café. Andoain is governed by a Batasuna mayor; Batasuna or whatever it's calling itself now is the political arm of ETA. The town has the reputation of being a refuge for etarras and such undesirables, and it is one of the centers of the kale borroka, vandalism and street-fighting carried out by pro-ETA youth gangs. They bravely held a demonstration in Andoain this afternoon with the slogan "ETA ez--ETA no." Not nearly enough people showed up and some of those who did looked a bit scared, as if they were in enemy territory. They had an anti-ETA demo at one of the universities and some people showed up in ski-masks. The gunman is thought to be a member of a refounded commando Donosti, Donostia cell. These cells have had the pattern, recently, of pulling off a couple of jobs before being caught within about two weeks. The police chief's murder was the first of a string of two or three that we will see before these scumballs get busted or, hopefully, killed. "Basque Homeland and Liberty", my ass.

I really hate the ETA.

Posted 14:49 by John

Well, the Russians are flip-flopping again on the war after a phone conference between Chirac and Putin. I vote we've made enough concessions to Russia and that they make up their minds whether they're in or they're out. As for Chirac, he's threatening to use France's veto. If he does so, he's breaking up the alliance as far as I'm concerned. Allies and friends do not have to fanatically follow every American whim. They may abstain, as Britain did in Vietnam, or even verbally oppose, as most European countries did in Nam, but they can't impede, as a French (or Russian) Security Council veto would do. That would be the action of an unfriendly state. Looks like Putin's going to get some more persuading, though, since Monday he's going to Germany and France in another round of the diplomatic whirl.

The Germans have received Donald Rumsfeld "coldly" in Munich, where Rumsfeld is now after meeting with Berlusconi in Italy, where he said, "Diplomacy has failed...Not reacting now would have much more serious and devastating consequences than doing so." This, combined with Bush's "The game is over", the mobilizing of the 101st Airborne, and the embarking of the Kitty Hawk carrier group for the Indian Ocean, make me think the war is on and that it will begin soon, within ten days, before Feb. 18. The German defense minister is mad, since Rumsfeld compared Germany with Cuba and Libya in his list of countries that reject US military action (gee, I thought a leftist would be pleased to be compared with Fidel Castro). He's promised that he'll "ask for explanations". Sounds to me like he's bragging that he's going to call Rumsfeld on the carpet. If I were him I'd watch it, because Rummy is likely to chew him up and spit him out.

Gearhead Schröder and Jockitch Fischer have played their hand and they've got a pair of deuces. Gearhead has solemnly sworn that he will not vote yes on a second Security Council resolution. This means he can either abstain, which wouldn't be a horribly unfriendly act and is probably Germany's best move now, or vote no, which would put Germany on the double-secret probation shit list and create a rift that Schröder's successor will have some trouble patching over.

Jockitch Fischer visited the Pope and his minions and they had a nice little talk about how the war is bad. The Pope, poor old man--well, he's had a long, fulfilling life in the service of humanity, and I respect him and his moral status though I disagree with him on many things. He's done a lot more to further peace in the world than anyone else who's won the Nobel Peace Prize lately--is functionally a vegetable. The people who seem to be running things in the Vatican are Cardinal Secretary of State Angelo Sodano, Foreign Minister Jean-Louis Tauran, and spokesman and press secretary Joaquín Navarro-Valls, an Italian, a Frenchman, and a Spaniard, Latin Europeans all. Is there anything more Old Europe than the Catholic Church? Latin Europeans are probably about one-sixth of Catholics worldwide, but they certainly exercise a disproportionate influence over the Church, which badly needs a strong dose of democratization.

Giscard "d'Estaing" is accusing the Gang of Eight of violating the Treaty of Maastricht by a) not abstaining from actions which contravene EU foreign policy and b) not coordinating their actions within other international organizations. So if Britain or France or Italy, or the Eastern European countries after they join the Union, want to exercise their own foreign policy without having to submit to the writ of Brussels--well, they can't, says Giscard. Hey, all you Brits out there, what do you think of this? You like the idea that the Eurocrats can tell you how to behave toward other countries or when you can use your army--would they have let you take back the Falklands if it had been their decision?--or vote however you want in the UN and in NATO? Do you want to give Brussels and Paris and Berlin a veto over what you can do? I thought we fought two world wars and the Cold War in the last century mostly because neither you nor we thought that would be a good idea, and I don't know how many times you fought to stay outside the orbit of Paris during the whole last millenium. Now if that's what you want to do, take orders from Brussels and Paris and Berlin, that's fine, it's your decision, but that's not what I would want if I were you.

It makes sense for Spain to follow EU dictates because a) they give us a lot of money and b) an active foreign policy is not one of the most productive ways Spain could spend its energies. Economic development is still so important here that it would be presuming above our station if we tried to throw our weight around. You wouldn't have seen Aznar signing up with the US-led alliance if at least Britain hadn't been with him; Spain is just not strong enough to oppose the four biggest European powers all by itself.

Posted 12:20 by John

The big news in the Vanguardia today is Joan Gaspart's announced resignation as president of FC Barcelona. That's the only thing they were talking about this morning down at the café. As you know, the Barça (possibly excepting La Caixa, the huge savings bank) is the most important civic institution in Barcelona, with at least 100,000 dues-paying members. Several important members of the board of directors, who are also influential citizens, have resigned because of their displeasure with the fortunes of the club, and Gaspart was under tremendous pressure, even from the governing Convergence and Union Catalan nationalist party. Threatened by a possible vote of no confidence, he chucked it up yesterday and announced that he's resigning as of March 1. Enric Reyna will take over as temporary president of the club until new elections are held after the football season.

Since Gaspart took over at the beginning of the 2000-2001 season, Barça has finished fourth twice and is currently in fifteenth place in the League, has been knocked out of the Cup in the first round by second-division teams twice, and has, at least, made it to the semifinals in the Champions' League twice in a row. They are, for some ungodly reason, probably because they've played only mediocre teams except AS Roma and Newcastle, undefeated and untied in this year's Champions' League. This is inexplicable. Because they suck.

First, figure that a real star player should cost €20 million and up. Also figure that if you can sign young promises for a fraction of that cash, a couple of million or so, you're betting that one or two of them will mature into good players. Both approaches are justifiable and a wise team does both things. So, anyway, Gaspart has purchased the following players for the following amount of money (figure a euro is about a dollar): 2000-01 Overmars €39.6 million, Gerard €21.6m, Alfonso €14.8m, Petit €12.6 m. Alfonso and Petit are no longer with the team, Gerard sits on the bench, and Overmars is playing like someone who cost €3.96 rather than €39.6 million. In 2001-02 he bought Saviola for €29.8m, Geovanni for €20.6m, Christianval for €16.8m, Rochemback for €14.6m, Andersson for €8m, and the loan of Coco for €2.4m. Coco and Geovanni are already gone, Andersson and Christianval have barely played because of injuries, and Saviola and Rochemback have been disappointing so far. They ran out of money this year and only bought Riquelme for €11.5m and the loan of Sorín for €0.6m. Riquelme has been disappointing and Sorín looks like a competent, journeyman defender and not a bad deal. That's a total of 194.9 million euros, almost all pissed away. For less than that amount of money Madrid bought Zidane, Figo, and Ronaldo. Gaspart's management of the team is the most incompetent I have ever seen, even worse than the Kansas City Royals, and the Royals have the excuse that they don't have any money to spend and never did. Gaspart has got the Barça in a hole they won't get out of for at least two years while they rebuild from the youth squad and hope that at least one of these expensive guys turns it around and starts playing like he's worth the money they spent on him.

Posted 02:24 by John

The Vanguardia's focus on Friday was the split in NATO over the probable war in Iraq; the US-led alliance has sixteen countries in agreement that "time for discussion has run out and it is time to act". The three holdouts are France, Germany, and Belgium. Those three countries will not provide logistical help nor intervene in the defense of Turkey should that be necessary (remember, Turkey shares a border with Iraq and is justifiably just a bit nervous). The Paris-Brussels-Berlin Axis of Weasels is blocking a NATO resolution in support of the US-UK-Italy-Spain position; the passage of this resolution will provide NATO logistic help, as according to the process the A. of W. must object in writing before 10 AM Monday. If they don't, and doing so would mean sticking their scrawny chicken necks way far out, the resolution automatically passes.

So, basically, the Atlantic Alliance is behind the United States. France, Belgium, and Germany are the three nations in conflict with the rest. The European Union, though, headquartered in--you guessed it--Brussels, is with the Axis of Weasels. They've already taken a vote in the Europarliament and they done decided they be agin the war. Remember that the EU includes several countries that are not in NATO (Sweden, Finland, Austria, Ireland, all four of which were neutral during the Cold War), which are all signed on to the A. of W. But Javier Solana, Spanish Socialist (I repeat that this guy has nothing to do with the present government of Spain) EU foreign policy chief, came out and said that Powell's report on Wednesday to the Security Council was "very solid and very important", that it "should be taken very seriously by everyone", and that "everyone should think about" the content of what Powell had to say. Well, that's positive.

The goddamn Old Europeans are so bloody legalistic that all of this is being taken with the utmost seriousness over here. It's very important to them that something like this go through official channels. I swear that they're more annoyed about the idea of the United States throwing all the goddamn legalistic UN bureaucratic crap out the window than they are about the violation of Iraqi sovereignty or the innocent civilians who, unfortunately, are going to get killed. Well, all right, if it makes them happy, we can jump through their hoops as long as we eventually get to do what we want to do. I think that "eventually" is very soon.

The Vatican is making a lot of antiwar noise. This is taken seriously by the very traditionalist monarchist Catholic owners of the Vangua, the family of the Count of Godó. The Vangua's unwritten rule is no dissing the Church, no dissing the Army, and no dissing the King. Other than that, they don't seem to exercise censorship.

Jordi Pujol, Prime Minister of Catalonia, is in the United States; he gave a speech at Georgetown University. His political party, Convergence and Union, has gone antiwar, but guess what...he hasn't! Jordi is pro-American! Among the things he said: "The West is in danger...one of the causes is the growing European secularization. Europe has been defined as a post-God or post-Christian society" Pujol continued, "Europe is relativist and secularist while the US is religious and moralistic and this has consequences in the concept of personal responsibility and in the country's image...and values end up influencing policy." As for anti-Americanism, Pujol denounced it, and said, "Europe complains about American unilateralism, when the unilateralism is provoked by Europe's lack of response...As a European I would like for Europe to make the effort to become a world power too. This would mean accepting political, financial, and military responsibility, and at this moment we are not doing so." Well said, Mr. Pujol. Jordi is an old fox. I've criticized him for his political-boss style, for his throwing money around, and for his continual resort to the "An attack on me is an attack on Catalonia" strategy when criticized or challenged, but two things. First, Pujol is no dummy. He is the opposite of a dummy. He has held his job for the last twenty-four years. Second, Pujol has backbone. He did three years in prison and suffered physical torture back in the early Sixties under the Franco regime. He is not afraid to stand up for what he believes in, which leads to an annual foot-in-mouth outbreak when he talks before thinking and says something outrageously racist.

Posted 14:42 by John

This Dallas "hard country" station, KHYI "The Range", is pretty cool. It plays real redneck country stuff, and real rednecks listen to it; you can tell by all the people who call in. I highly recommend it. As the DJ says, "If you want your country music to sound like the Bee Gees, just move on down the dial". For you foreigners, it might be an interesting experience to tune in. This is l'Amerique profonde here. Another station I like a lot is Bluegrass Country Dot Org. They're a little more oriented toward the NPR listener than the Evan Williams-chugging folks in the trailer park, in the sense that they don't pay any attention to the hits (are there bluegrass hit songs?); they record eight or nine bluegrass shows from different stations around the world and then play them back. Each show is repeated several times during the week.

Posted 14:27 by John

I know I sound like a broken record, but I am thoroughly convinced of the evil of the conspiracy theory and its destructive effect both on the leaders and the general public of a society. Look at the Terror during the French Revolution, in which faction after faction was sent to the guillotine, accused of treason. Or the stab in the back theory of why Germany lost the Great War, which combined with always latent European anti-Semitism (itself, of course, the most murderous conspiracy theory of all time) added up to produce the Third Reich, World War II, and the Holocaust. Or, closer to home, the Communist accusation that the POUM and the Anarchists were conspiring with Franco in the Spanish Civil War. Or such disgraceful episodes in American history as the Catholic-bashing of the pre-Civil War era, the Red Scare of 1919, and the McCarthy smear campaign of the early Fifties.

Anyway, through the Internet Public Library I found a book called The Day of the Confederacy: A Chronicle of the Embattled South by one Nathaniel Wright Stephenson. It's about the internal political and economic history of the Confederacy and is highly interesting, at least to me. So, in 1864 it's obvious that the South is going to lose because the North has bigger and better-supplied armies. Jeff Davis, who had authoritarian tendencies and a number of blind spots, blamed...you guessed it...

Davis urged Congress to revive the statute
permitting martial law and the suspension of the writ of habeas
corpus. The President told Congress that in parts of the
Confederacy "public meetings have been held, in some of which a
treasonable design is masked by a pretense of devotion of state
sovereignty, and in others is openly avowed...a strong
suspicion is entertained that secret leagues and associations are
being formed. In certain localities men of no mean position do
not hesitate to avow their disloyalty and hostility to our cause,
and their advocacy of peace on the terms of submission and the
abolition of slavery."

This suspicion on the part of the Confederate Government that it
was being opposed by organized secret societies takes us back to
debatable land and to the previous year. The Bureau of
Conscription submitted to the Secretary of War a report from its
Alabama branch relative to "a sworn secret organization known to
exist and believed to have for its object the encouragement of
desertion, the protection of deserters from arrest, resistance to
conscription, and perhaps other designs of a still more dangerous
character." To the operations of this insidious foe were
attributed the shifting of the vote in the Alabama elections, the
defeat of certain candidates favored by the Government, and the
return in their stead of new men "not publicly known." The
suspicions of the Government were destined to further
verification in the course of 1864 by the unearthing of a
treasonable secret society in southwestern Virginia, the members
of which were "bound to each other for the prosecution of their
nefarious designs by the most solemn oaths. They were under
obligation to encourage desertions from the army, and to pass and
harbor all deserters, escaped prisoners, or spies; to give
information to the enemy of the movements of our troops, of
exposed or weakened positions, of inviting opportunities of
attack, and to guide and assist the enemy either in advance or
retreat." This society bore the grandiloquent name "Heroes of
America" and had extended its operations into Tennessee and North
Carolina.

In the course of the year further evidence was collected which
satisfied the secret service of the existence of a mysterious and
nameless society which had ramifications throughout Tennessee,
Alabama, and Georgia. A detective who joined this "Peace
Society," as it was called, for the purpose of betraying its
secrets, had marvelous tales to tell of confidential information
given to him by members, of how Missionary Ridge had been lost
and Vicksburg had surrendered through the machinations of this
society.*

* What classes were represented in these organizations it is
difficult if not impossible to determine. They seem to have been
involved in the singular "peace movement" which is yet to be
considered. This fact gives a possible clue to the problem of
their membership. A suspiciously large number of the "peace" men
were original anti-secessionists, and though many, perhaps most,
of these who opposed secession became loyal servants of the
Confederacy, historians may have jumped too quickly to the
assumption that the sincerity of all of these men was above
reproach.

Posted 20:28 by John

The general Spanish reaction to Colin Powell's performance at the UN has been something along the lines of: they have pretty good evidence of Iraq's weapons programs and signs that point to a Saddam-Al Qaeda connection. However, none of this is irrefutable proof. The Spanish government says it is. All the other political parties disagree with them.

On the Security Council it looks like the US, UK, Spain, and Bulgaria want action now and everybody else wants to give the inspectors more time. I do not think giving the inspectors more time is going to turn up anything new and I think Powell's presentation demonstrated sufficiently that Saddam Hussein deserves to be overthrown, as if anybody doubted it.

They had a Parliamentary debate on the war yesterday at the Congreso de los Diputados in Madrid. José María Aznar defended his current course of strong support for the Alliance. Zapatero, the Socialist leader in Parliament and probable 2004 candidate, came out yesterday against an attack on Iraq even if there's a second Security Council resolution. He said, "War without proof would be disproportionate and unjust." Said Llamazares of the United Left, "This war is illegitimate and unjust." Anasagasti of the PNV said "The war is an imperative of the economic growth of the United States." Puigcercós of the Republican Left said, "The Government has broken up European consensus," and Saura of Initiative said, "Don't trade blood for oil." All of these people are going to look extremely stupid after the war when the evidence of Saddam's weapons programs and links to terrorism all comes out, not to mention the horrific violations of human rights. As I've said before, Saddam has done to death tens of thousands of innocent people in the basement cells of Baghdad and hundreds of thousands more on battlefields and in areas of repression since he effectively took power in 1969. When it's all thrown in people's faces at once the Belsen effect will make everyone forget all about whether one UN resolution or two was necessary to overthrow the murderous son-of-a-bitch, and those who said the war was unjust will have some serious explaining to do.

Doctors Without Borders, Amnesty International, Greenpeace, and Intermón-Oxfam have shown their real colors. Gee, I thought they were supposed to, respectively, give health care to poor people, work to free political prisoners (USA = 0, Iraq = thousands, by the way), lie about the environment, and feed hungry people, respectively. Well, they're all working agianst the war. They've jointly set up a website, www.antelaguerraactua.org, should you want to check it out. I don't, personally, so there's no link, but you can look at it if you want. None of those people are getting any of my money ever again, and I gave just a little to Doctors Without Borders at Christmas. They will never see one more duro of my cash. I don't care whether they do good work or not, which Oxfam and DWB are at least occasionally known to do; Amnesty and Greenpeace are just assholes, in my opinion. Do the people who support these supposedly humanitarian organizations understand that they have stridently leftist and anti-American political agendas, that they're the same old pinkos dressed up in different costumes?

Posted 12:45 by John

Here's another side of the story in Spanish: this is the committee of artists or whatever organized against an Allied attack on Iraq. I'm not going to translate what they say since it's the same load of Stalinist bullshit that you'd expect. What is fascinating, though, is their deep and bitter hate for the United States and everything about it.

These people are among those calling for a large antiwar demonstration for February 15 in Madrid and Barcelona. Mainstream political groups like the Socialist Party, the UGT (Socialist labor union), and even Convergence and Union are co-sponsors of this event, along with rather more leftist groups like Initiative for Catalonia and the Republican Left, and then the hard-core Communists in CCOO, the Communist labor union, the CGT, the Trotskyist labor union, the Greens, and the Stalinist United and Alternative Left. ATTAC is a sponsor, as are "La Torna", the squatters' headquarters in Gràcia, and such folks as the Antimilitarist Assembly of Catalonia and the Collective for an Alternative Left. Then, somehow, the Gracia Fiesta Commission has wound up as one of the sponsors. I thought they were in charge of shaking down shopkeepers to pay for hanging up bunting and hiring disco DJs and gadinga-dinga bands.

Then you might check out this organization called "En lluita" (In Struggle), which may not consist of more than one local wacko, but is another of the sponsors. One of their articles (here, in poorly spelled Catalan) consists of a justification and apology for violent terrorism. The guy who wrote it was in the slam, presumably for blowing something up. Ironically, these wannabe murderers are sponsoring a demonstration for peace. Or there are a bunch of anarchoindependentista wankers called Batzac who are also sponsoring the big peace march; they justify ETA terrorism as part of their incredibly boring declaration of Bakuninista principles. For the record, here's the link, but please don't read it unless you want to become seriously comatose and can't get any good pills.

Posted 12:03 by John

Want more sides of the story? Here's the Iraqi news agency's home page featuring a spiffy official biography of Saddam Hussein, which includes this sentence in which every word is a lie except for "the", "and", and "on".

(Saddam) Led the Iraqi people an army wisely and bravely against the aggression initiated and launched against Iraq by Khomeini' s regime on September 4, 1980, which ended in Iraq 's great victory on August 8, 1988.

Or check out this one, which manages to avoid using the word "Kuwait".

Led his country in confrontation the aggression launched by 33 countries led by US. which waged war against Iraq, the Iraqis' confrontation of which is called by Arabs and Iraqis as the Battle of Battles (Um Al-Ma' arik) , where Iraq stood fast against the invasion, maintaining its sovereignty and political system.

Posted 11:46 by John

We've recently been accused of peddling propaganda here at Iberian Notes. We've been told that we're not paying enough attention to all sides of the story. You want all sides of the story? Check out the North Koreans' side of the story. Here's the best article up today. Note the sophisticated argumentation.

U.S. imperialists' ambition to dominate Korea under fire

Pyongyang, February 5 (KCNA) -- The U.S. imperialists should drop their moves to stifle the DPRK by force of arms, mindful that their bid is a daydream that can not be realized any time, says Rodong Sinmun today in a signed article. It goes on:
It is by the U.S. that the DPRK was compelled to withdraw from the NPT.
Since the emergence of the Bush administration, the U.S. imperialists have been more frenzied in the moves to stifle the DPRK. They designated it as part of an "axis of evil" and a target of preemptive nuclear attacks. Recently they clamoured for "tailored containment" and "military sanctions" upon the DPRK under the pretext of the "nuclear issue."
But it is a big miscalculation to think that the DPRK may be frightened by some military threat or pressure, "blockade" or "sanctions."
The U.S. imperialists should not run amuck, mindful of who is their opponent.
The DPRK Government's decision to withdraw from the NPT is revelation of the firm faith and will of its army and people to smash the U.S. imperialists' anti-DPRK campaign with the toughest stance and safeguard the sovereignty and security of the country.
We have invincible might enough to defeat any formidable enemy who encroaches upon our sovereignty and security.

You'll note that farther down the page we are informed that North Korean scientists have developed new antiseptics and paints. "Well, we haven't had anything to eat for two years except rice and bugs, but we've got a new antiseptic to treat the famine boils that are breaking out all over our bodies! Thank you, Dear Leader!"

Posted 13:24 by John

Just came across this sort of by accident through Fox News. It's a White House document called "What Does Disarmament Look Like?" It's basically a grievance list; the White House first says what real disarmament looks like, using South Africa, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan as examples, and then shows how Saddam's behavior contrasts with honest disarmament. It's clear, concise, and straightforward, and calls to mind images of sinister Saddam goons sneaking around in the middle of the night hiding barrels of nerve gas under the banks of the Euphrates. Check it out if you haven't seen it yet. It's a PDF file.

Posted 17:22 by John

I found the Alliance of Anti-Imperialist Intellectuals and their manifesto, which you can find here translated by Google to English. I couldn't be bothered to translate this load of wank correctly, sorry, but it's actually rather better in the Google version than I could ever do. The signers are the same old bunch of jokers, but some have oddly poetic names; how about Laura Dwells Hair of Dawn? Or Loving Irene? That could be a movie title. Mountain Juana must be a big eater. Cross García Maple sounds like a Mexican Catholic brand of syrup. We've got animals too, including Francisco Fernández Ox and Quintín Goatherd. And some of the signers are obviously violent folks; what is Striking Rosary doing signing peacenik manifestoes? Or how about To Pound Bardem, which actually sounds like a good idea. I'd sure like to pound on that whole family. The most inappropriate name, though, is Juan Kills Anaya. Why isn't he in jail instead of signing crap like this? Then, of course, there is the ineffable Car It Frabetti. And the guy we like the best, though he seems to be missing an eye, is Juan Francisco Dry Martin. The perfect way to wind down after a long day demonstrating against like war and stuff.

Posted 16:51 by John

Another murder, this time in the working-class Poblenou district. Street fight got ugly and somebody stabbed somebody else. Dumbass Socialist mayor has stupid plan to turn Poblenou into "22nd district", high-tech area, convert warehouses to lofts, that kind of gentrification crap which only works if it isn't planned. So here's a letter to the editor from today's "20 minutos", which is a free paper they give away every morning.

Still recently shocked by the death of a youth of 17 years on my street for looking the wrong way at his girlfriend's ex, of 19 years, which led to a cold-blooded murder and then an attempt by several dozen people at a lynching, makes me wonder if the capitalist system that we have imported from the USA, which Aznar declares so much love for, isn't leading us to their errors.

If the precarious labor market and unemployment, development speculation, ultracompetition, crisis, frustration and the lack of future prospects are not leading the youths, and with them all of us (just look at the tension there is in sports stadiums, discos, and entertainment centers) to self-destruction in the forms of drugs and alcohol or, simply, the loss of values or the most primitive violence inherent in the neoliberal system itself. Is this the kind of society we aspire to? To all the political parties and government bodies who have supported the free market, welcome to the new 22nd district. Welcome to the Bronx.

Raül Landeras Alfonso
Barcelona

Looks like if some punk stabs some other punk in a brawl in a Barcelona slum and the locals try to lynch him, it's America's fault.

Posted 16:32 by John

Looks like the strategy is all set. Powell goes to the Security Council tomorrow. He shows something resembling evidence that Saddam is a bad person. Berlusconi has put the pressure on Vladimir Putin and Vlad is in line, saying that "Everything should be decided in the Security Council. For now, a second resolution is not indispensable, but we're not ruling it out." Vlad has been convinced. Blair gets to twist Chirac's arm today in their meeting. The French will fall into line although Blair and Chirac each think the other is an arrogant prick. The Germans? They're left with two bad choices. Rotten diplomatic job by Schröder.

Socialist candidate for prime minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero is refusing to back PP prime minister José María Aznar on his pro-alliance stance. In a meeting yesterday, Aznar asked for Zapatero's support in the name of national unity three times and Zapatero said, "No." Zapatero says, "The government has been nothing more than a follower of Bush" and "International pressure can achieve the disarmament of Iraq." Aznar called Zapatero's attitude "rancid isolationism." Motormouth Juan Carlos Rodríguez Ibarra, Socialist party boss of Extremadura and one of the three big regional Socialist bosses, known as "party barons", said that Spain should not support an attack on Iraq even with the United Nations' agreement. Either 1) he was just shooting off his mouth again or 2) the Socialists are floating a balloon and seeing who takes a shot at it.

Last Saturday night they had the Goya Awards, Spain's Oscars. It turned into a glorious big stink. First, "Los lunes al sol" won all the big awards to the detriment of Pedro Almodóvar's "Hable con ella". "Los lunes al sol" had been previously chosen as Spain's representative to the Oscars, though the Almodóvar movie got such good press that it's being considered not just for best foreign movie but for the regular Academy Awards. Gossip is flying around wildly, mostly to the effect that the Spanish Academy has it in for Almodóvar and wouldn't award him anything without a gun at their heads. Second, virtually all the movie people involved, actors, directors, and the like, wore "No to War" badges, and several of them, especially those related with "Los lunes al sol", made fiery impassioned speeches about, like, imperialism and all. Among those who made fools out of themselves in public were Javier Bardem, Fernando León, Luis Tosar, and Alejandro Amenábar. If y'all out there want to boycott someone for openly supporting idiotarianism, look no farther than Tom Cruise's (relatively) new beard, Penélope Cruz. By the way, "Dígame", a horrendously bad Spanish scandal magazine, claims that Penélope Cruz's cousin, Mari Flor, who is a dead ringer for Penélope, is a high-euro prostitute in Madrid. Just in case you were wondering. Iberian Notes, the "Hush-Hush" of the blogs! Maybe I'll change the name to "BCN Confidential". Third, this pissed off the government and the minister of Culture. The antiwar protesters are screaming "censorship" because the film clips of the ceremony released by government TV (which was broadcasting the ceremony) didn't include any of their antiwar speeches, which were apparently the same old blather.

Powerful Barcelona lawyer Miquel Roca, ex-number two of Jordi Pujol's Catalan nationalist party, writes in today's Vanguardia,

Old Europe must learn that in the new Europe, the anti-Americanism that, more or less covered up, has characterized its policy for decades, can no longer inspire the Union's common policy.

It isn't Bush's fault, it's all of our fault, the Europeans' fault. We have been more capable of criticizing the United States than of formulating alternative, functional, and efficient policies. We don't trust American military power, but we disarmed because we trust the US to protect us or substitute for us internationally. We debated about Kosovo but we sent the Americans to pacify it; we lament what is happening in Palestine and we accuse the United States of not guaranteeing peace with its own military intervention.

New Europe has suffered the oppression of both totalitarianisms, the Nazi and the Soviet. It would be difficult for it to be anti-American, too. We're not talking about right and left; Havel's signature is right there to ally with Bush. We can't extend Europe and think that nothing is going to change. On the contrary, New Europe gives Old Europe hope for a better understanding of the world.

Europe cannot be, simply, a suburb of Paris or Berlin.

Very generous of Mr. Roca, who is a man of some mettle. He's out of politics now, has been for years, and apparently has no plans to get back in. Too bad. He's a genuine moderate. If he ran for something I'd vote for him.

Looks like the Prestige oil spill is under control. They went back to collecting shellfish along a good part of the Galician coast yesterday. In some places they still have some spilled fuel to clean up, and tiny amounts of fuel are still leaking out of the sunken ship, but the worst is over. The Left is still trying to smack the Government around the head with the Prestige incident, as if it were, like, their fault or something. One of the jokers at the Goya Awards said something like, "Tell Shorty (Aznar) that if he wants oil he doesn't need to go to Iraq, we have plenty in Galicia." Baltasar Porcel made the same alleged witticism, which confirms its lameness.

Here's the difference between the Right and the Left. The process of policy-making consists of collecting information, determining that some action should be taken based on it, framing choices, making a decision among them, implementing the policy, and explaining it to the constituents. The Right says, when it criticizes a policy, "You're operating on insufficient information" or "You failed to frame the most logical choice correctly and didn't even consider it" or "The decision was fine but the implementation was lousy" (which is more or less the case with the Prestige oil spill). The Left says, when it criticizes a policy, "The whole system is corrupt and evil so naturally the wrong thing was done."

Posted 14:10 by John

When I think "diaspora", I think of the Jews and the Armenians and the Irish. This article from the Economist, which is a month old now, is definitely worth a read. It's about the influence that people from a nation who are living overseas, away from home, can have on their home countries, and gives a ton of examples of diasporas that I hadn't thought of--the Ghanaians, the Eritreans, the Balts, the Mexicans, the Chinese, the Italians, the Tamils, and more. Thinking about it, I'll bet a significant proportion of Anglo-Canadians in Ontario are part of an American Tory diaspora; others went to Britain or the West Indies. There's definitely a Gallego diaspora in the Americas, so much so that a common Latin American pejorative for "Spaniard" is "gallego".

I remember a story--seems that the Spanish ambassador in Buenos Aires came by the Casa Rosada for some reason and one of Eva Perón's parties was in full swing at nine in the morning. A somewhat exalted Evita shouted, "Get that gallego de mierda out of here!" The ambassador drew himself up to his full Castilian blue-blooded, blue-veined height, looked down his aquiline nose, and replied, "Tell Mrs. Perón the gallego will be leaving but the mierda will be staying."

Here's a link from As, one of the Madrid sports papers, to a series of articles about Dmitri Piterman, one of the Ukranian diaspora. Piterman was born in Odessa but became a millionaire businessman in America. Several years ago he bought a second-division Catalan soccer club, Palamós, for some unknown reason. He coached the team himself, but nothing particularly special happened. Anyway, he just bought himself a First Division team, Racing Santander. They're historically an "elevator" team, one that continually goes up and down between Second and First divisions. He's going to turn Racing around, he says, and his first plan is to sign Romario. He's been trying to coach the team himself but they've sued him, alleging that he doesn't have a coach's license and therefore can't be a coach. Piterman, quite reasonably, doesn't consider soccer coaching to be related in any way to brain surgery and wonders why the hell he needs a license to tell a bunch of guys in skivvies to kick the ball in the goal. This is taken as being "brash and American-style". Wait until Al Davis and Jerry Jones and that schmuck in Washington decide to invest in the Spanish soccer league and provide it with some much-needed, uh, professionalism. Actually, sports owners the world around are huge jackasses. The real Jesús Gil and our own Joan Gaspart, not to mention Ruíz Mateos's wife, are prime examples of folks who would do the NFL proud.

Posted 12:05 by John

In case you were wondering what's at the top of the charts in the UK, it's a Russian adolescent female duo named t.A.T.u. with their new LP/CD, Pedophile Pop. Link here for all you ever wanted to know about Julia and Lena! Iberian Notes: your one-stop source for entertainment news.

Here's Sky News's take on the phenomenon, with information about Lena and Julia's hot new videos, if you know what I mean, and I think you do. Check out the photo. I completely agree with one of the interviewees for this article: "It's disgusting to see record companies appealing to the dirty-old-man market."

Posted 22:38 by John

Well, there's not a whole lot of big news on the Iraq front, according to the Vanguardia. The back-page interview today went to Pierre-Richard Prosper, who is, curiously, American. With a name like that he should be writing semiotic criticisms of class and gender roles and their dysfunction in a post-socialist society, but he's the "U.S. Ambassador to Try War Criminals", which is something I'd never heard of before. He's been trying war criminals in Rwanda, the ex-Yugoslavia, Sierra Leone, and Afghanistan. He really doesn't say too much you haven't heard before except for his explanation of what's happening in Guantánamo. "We have divided the 600 Taliban prisoners into three groups. The first group, of 11, were released because they did not represent a danger toward the world. Then there are those who are a threat but should be tried in their country of origen...(the others) are those who said under interrogation that they would attack the West as soon as they could. They, and the group who should be tried in the US because of their leadership role, must stay at Guantánamo." The other good bit is when the interviewer asks him, "And Kissinger? What do you think about Judge Garzón's attempt at interrogating him?" Prosper's answer is, "Ha, ha." Says the interviewer, "Doesn't that worry you?" Prosper answers, "Ha, ha."

The Gang of Eight's letter has had a pro-alliance effect on European opinion, especially the fact that the universally respected Vaclav Havel signed it. Here's the Vanguardia's page two lead editorial signed by Alfredo Abián. It's titled "Havel and the anti-imperialists" and is in italics below.

The Alliance of Anti-Imperialist Intellectuals, who turned the Goya awards (Spain's Oscars) into an antiwar protest, would probably condemn Vaclav Havel for his alignment with the United States. Although the Czech dramatist, who left the presidency of his country yesterday, cannot be denied his status as an honest intellectual. The problem is that Havel's personal experiences and discourse are excessively sophisticated for those who consider that capitalism is the leading world terrorist. Havel was a prisoner of the Iron Curtain: censorship, arrests, five years in prison. This is why he scorns the slogans and rhetorical flourishes that real Communism used in its day to capture so many honorable people. but he also knew how to keep the idealism that led him to call for a world in which the voice of the poets would be as powerful as that of the stockbrokers, although directly afterward he warns against those who want the planet to become a poem by the hands of pipers and troubadors. Havel understands that politics must benefit humanity and that therefore one must act consciously without paying attention to criticism or the polls. He defends attacking evil in its own lair, even through the use of force. Among other things, because he has always thought that the Second World War could have been avoided if Paris and London had not made concessions in order to appease Hitler's Berlin.

Posted 14:24 by John

OK, I think I've calmed down enough to write about the continuing soap opera that is FC Barcelona. Hated coach Louis Van Gaal was fired last week and then they couldn't decide who they should get to replace him. For several days the Barça was without a coach as club functionary Antonio de la Cruz filled in until they finally decided who Van Gaal's replacement would be. That someone turned out to be Serb Radomir Antic, whose last two major accomplishments have been getting first Atlético de Madrid and then Oviedo sent down to Second Division. Antic takes over as coach today.

De la Cruz was the coach Saturday night as a frightened and decimated Barca squad went into the Calderón to face Atlético de Madrid before 55,000 fans waving red and white flags and scarves and howling, "Down to Second! Down to Second!", meaning Second Division. Proud Barcelona is one of only three Spanish clubs (the others are Real Madrid and At. Bilbao) which has never descended to Second since the league was founded in 1929. So far.

Cocu and Kluivert were suspended for one game for accumulating too many yellow cards, so they missed the match, as did an injured Saviola. De la Cruz threw a defense together consisting of Bonano in goal and a back-line four of, right to left, Puyol, Christianval, De Boer, and Reiziger. Bonano's confidence is shattered and he can't play with his feet; if the opposing forwards pressure him he chokes up and makes bad and dangerous passes. Cost him a goal last week and damn near cost him one this week. Steady, stalwart Puyol is definitely the team's MVP, but he can't do it all. Christianval, who has barely played this year because of a series of injuries, limped off again yesterday after twenty minutes. Oleguer from the B-team, who is like 19, was the only defenseman on the bench that could sub him, and he did a fine job. None of Atlético's goals came from the right side. They all came from the left, defended by over-the-hill Frank de Boer, whose decline has been tremendous since he left Ajax, and out-of-position and over-the-hill Reiziger, who is right-footed but was playing on the left side. These two guys were toast all night, which is why Barça got schnockered, 3-0.

There was plenty of blame to go around. Midfielder Xavi had a decent game, but his partner Rochemback was dreadful until he got himself kicked out of the game during a scuffle with Jose Mari, who had started it, but they both got sent off. And the offensive four were just awful. OK, Riquelme wasn't too bad, but right-winger Mendieta apparently has been taking suck pills, because he sure has sucked this year. As recently as two years ago he was one of the elite Spanish players. Then he went off to the Italian League, where he apparently learned how to suck. Forward Dani is through and should not be playing. And left-winger Overmars has recovered his speed but hasn't learned how to kick the ball accurately in the direction of the goal, which is his major failing.

Atlético has this season's Rookie of the Year, Fernando Torres, who is a hell of a forward and scored their first goal after burning Reiziger and De Boer. Then Contra burned Reiziger and De Boer and centered to Emerson's head for the second. Finally, with a few minutes left, former Barça player Luis García burned Reiziger and De Boer all by himself and scored number three. Good night, Mrs. Calabash. Reiziger and De Boer will be in the hospital for weeks with third-degree burns and so won't be able to play any more.. Actually, I wish the cited gentlemen no physical harm, but if that's the only way to get them out of the game, then so be it.

God help the Barça because nobody else can at this point. They're now in fifteenth place. Out of twenty teams. They are now having the absolute worst season in their history, even worse than those grim early 1940s teams of the postwar period. Imagine the Yankees losing a hundred games. That's what this is like. The Lakers this year might be an appropriate comparison, since they were supposed to make the finals again and instead may not make even the playoffs.

Posted 17:55 by John

It's interview day in today's Vangua; they've got a three-pager with Jordi Pujol. Who's Jordi Pujol? Jordi Pujol, around here, is sort of a cross between Mayor Daley and Yoda. He sure looks a lot like Yoda. But he's a tough political boss like Mayor Daley, and his Convergence and Union Catalan nationalist party has been, up to now, a well-oiled machine that has given Pujol six (or seven? I lose track) consecutive terms as Prime Minister of the Generalitat de Catalunya, the Catalan regional government. He will step down when this term runs out in nine months.

Posted 17:16 by John

The Vangua has a two-page interview today with Romano Prodme, boss of the European Commission. Prodme is an Italian Socialist. Most of the interview is a load of wank, but there are a few little pearls here.

Interviewer: Do you belong to the old Europe that Donald Rumsfeld, the American secretary of defense, has just criticized?
Prodme: Yes, yes, yes! I belong to the wise Europe, and I've said that it isn't age, it's wisdom. This has been my answer, because countries like Germany and France, which have turned their history of doubts and tragedies around and who are now together, are wise countries.

I: ...Chirac and Schröder have defended a multilateral concept of international relations anchored on the United Nations against the unilateral tension of the U.S. Are we beginning to see the real question?
P: Yes, but it's not the first time we've seen the problem. Last summer's debates over the International Criminal Court were of the same kind, like the debates over the Kyoto protocol. In every case, I've declared myself in favor of multilateral cooperation. i think, in the long term, that it will not be possible to have a unipolar world.

I: Are relations between the UE and the US entering a crisis?
P: Yes. There are problems...these political differences are very worrying.

I: You just told European Voice that Bush should stay out of European affairs.
P: That is another problem. I have never made a speech saying that Mexico should form part of the United States. I already said it to Clinton when we were talking together about Turkey and I repeat it now: it's our business. And, from my point of view, the pressures over the subject of the International Criminal Court and the expansion (of the EU) are interference. Enough! Stop! It's clear. The rules and the size of the European Union are totally European problems, and this is why we have to open a debate about how to transmit to the Europeans the idea that we are the actors of our destiny, the protagonists of our future. We, with all due friendship with
the Americans.

So much for multilateralism, which means to Prodme, "Let us tell you what to do and then you go ahead and do it. Our business is our business and your business is our business, but our business isn't your business." So America can't encourage Europe to admit Turkey, which Prodme is against; America can't refuse to let a bunch of foreigners try its soldiers and government officials, which Prodme is for; America can't set its own environmental standards, which Prodme is against; and America can't defend itself as it sees fit, which Prodme is against. However, the EU can tell Americans that they won't let Turkey into their little club no matter what and so we should shut up (oh, I forgot, the Europeans are in favor of negotiations. For other people), that they want the right to put our country's official representatives on trial whether we think they've done anything wrong or not, that we have to live by whatever environmental standards they deem appropriate, and that we have to consult them before defending ourselves. They can also tell us to stop executing murderers, not to plant genetically-modified seeds, to give away lots of money to Third World dictatorships, to refrain from collecting money owed us, to permit anyone who wants to immigrate to do so, and that we're generally a bunch of simplistic, stupid, racist, uncultured, arrogant, ill-mannered, aggressive, fanatical shits. Should you dare to talk back, like Donald Rumsfeld did in a tone much more delicate than the typical European strident howling, buckets of scurn will be dumped on your head.

What I would like to see, when the Iraq war is over, is for George W. Bush to say, "You know, you Europeans are right. We should stay out of your business. Therefore we are withdrawing from the UN and from NATO. All UN officials and delegates will lose their diplomatic license plates and pay all back parking tickets, including a 100% fine, and will be summarily deported. We will proceed to make bilateral or multilateral agreements with the countries we see fit regarding international cooperation. All other countries are perfectly free to do the same. No, I'm sorry, Mr. Prodme, I just don't have time to talk with you now, as I have some allies to visit with. Schedule's pretty much booked up, you know. Now, Mr. Meggyesy, what were you saying about a Hungarian-American commercial agreement? Why don't we call up Mr. Blair and Mr. Howard and a few of your neighbors to see if they want to join, too? What is that, Condi? A message from who? Gearhead Schröder? Is that guy still in office? Tell his successor we'll call him."

Posted 14:39 by John

The Space Shuttle disaster is, of course, the lead story in today's Vanguardia. The headline is "Space tragedy", and there's a large photo of the seven dead astronauts. The Vangua's lead editorial makes this generally good point: "For a minuscule but influential sector of the population, especially in the United States, the present circumstances of international tension, with a war on the way and the permanent threat of terrorism, will feed all kinds of conspiracy theories, whipped up by the presence on board of an Israeli officer. Reality, however, seems to be much simpler: the margin of safety, even in aerospace missions, is not and can never be absolute." That is, accidents can happen and one just did and there's nothing to do about it except mourn the dead and ensure that that particular accident doesn't happen again. I do have a quibble with the editorial, though; the conspiracy theorists are not especially influential in the United States (except on the far left), but rather in Europe, where they make up a major section of the population. In Greece 95% of the people think we're going into Iraq not to get rid of Saddam but to grab the oil, and this belief is almost as widespread in Spain.

There is a news analysis article, however, by someone who signs himself "Andy Robinson, New York correspondent." This guy is an American anti-globo lefty who is big on Marcuse, Fanon, and Chomsky, since every American who he agrees with is always billed as "a student of" one of these three guys. What that really means is someone who parrots the same old slogans that somebody else made up in about 1967, or 1847. Robinson's screeds show up occasionally--he's the guy who wrote the ridiculous story on the King assassination that we mentioned a few days ago. His angle is always "United States = bad: the inside story of what's really happening". The title of his little piece is "Wounded pride". Here are a couple of paragraphs.

The images of Ronald and Nancy Reagan, shocked and impotent while the technological pride of the United States went up in white smoke the morning of January 28, 1986, were almost forgotten. After the rapid bombing of Afghanistan, in 2001 even smart bombs had regained their reputation, which had been lost after the errors of the Gulf War and the embarrassing bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade...

In the military theater, Uncle Sam's technological ego suffered another hard blow after a series of evidence became known, proving that father Bush's and CNN's spectacular state-of-the-art technological weapons didn't work. The laser-guided missiles got lost in the dust storms of the Iraqi desert: of the 970 projectiles fired at nuclear and chemical factories, none hit its target, and the Patriot missiles weren't able to shoot down Saddam's old Scuds.

Nevertheless, confidence in perfect technology had been recovered in recent years. Despite the estimated 3000 civilians killed in the Afghan war, the long-distance bombs and airplanes without pilots were considered potent examples of the reaffirmation of American state-of-the-art technology. A new version of the Patriot will play a key role if there is a war in Iraq. And under pressure from the military-space lobby led by companies like Lockheed Martin, NASA has even brought back the space nuclear program. The launching of two small nuclear rockets had been planned for May. "If one of them disintegrates like the Columbia, a lot of people will die of cancer wherever it falls," says Grossman.

My impression of Mr. Robinson is that he is one of George Orwell's nationalists. A nationalist may be fiercely loyal to a country or an idea, or he may fiercely oppose one, because of his emotions rather than logic and reason. A nationalist differs from a patriot in that a patriot wants to see his unit become stronger but does not wish ill on other units, while a nationalist's goal is to subjugate other units to his. ("Buy American" is patriotic, though stupid. "Don't Buy Japanese" was a fairly common bit of American nationalism in the early eighties. See what I mean? A patriotic sports fan wants to see his team win. A nationalist sports fan wants to see his team's rival humiliated. He doesn't care if his team comes in next-to-last if the rival comes in last.) The most important thing for a nationalist is the comparative prestige of his chosen country or idea. Orwell says that one may be a positive or a negative nationalist--one may decide, for example, that one hates Communism, and then will think about nothing else except destroying Communism's prestige. I think Mr. Robinson is something not all that uncommon on the American left, someone from the teacher / journalist / bureaucrat class who feels alienated from the American society that he has not been especially successful in and therefore resents those who have been successful within the system. He wants to do a hit job on what he almost certainly sees as American pride and arrogance, so he brings up not only the Challenger, which makes perfect sense, but the only partial efficacy of high-tech weapons during the Gulf War, which has nothing to do with the subject.

Posted 20:46 by John

You almost certainly already know this, but just in case you don't, the Space Shuttle Columbia blew up today on re-entry. All seven astronauts were killed. Terrorism has been ruled out. An investigation, of course, will take place. This is the top story on both Catalan and Spanish TV this evening..

Posted 19:49 by John

It's time for today's European diplomacy update. Slovenia and Latvia have joined the countries who signed the pro-alliance letter that the Wall Street Journal commissioned, Aznar drafted, Blair rewrote, and eight other European leaders agreed to. Brussels is royally pissed off; the Eurocrats consider the letter to have been a rupture in the EU's common foreign policy, as if such a thing existed. They're whining about both the message of the letter and the way it was publicized; they're whining because they're beaten. Whipped. They've lost. They know it. They are not going to get anything resembling what they want and this is not the last tantrum they're going to throw, since emotionally Old Europe is about as mature as a toddler, thinking of nothing but itself and its own comparative prestige and unwilling to admit it didn't have much to start with and now has a lot less.

Javier Solana was made to look like a moron because the day before the Gang of Eight's letter came out he'd said that any decision on Iraq would have to be made by the UN. So what's the problem? Solana is a moron. He must be if he'd say something as obviously false as that. I've hated him ever since he did a human interest interview that I read and he started telling funny, rather sympathetic stories about Kim Jong Il. It seemed about as appropriate as, I don't know, reeling off a skein of light-hearted Hitler anecdotes. Meanwhile, I can't think of a single productive thing he's been responsible for as director of EU foreign policy.

The right-wing German press is baying for Schröder's defenestration, saying that the French are going to sign on with the alliance leaving Germany in the cold thanks to Ger-hardhead. He's trying to use the anti-American plank to pull out a decent showing for his Social Democrat party in the upcoming state elections in Hesse and Lower Saxony, but the Social Dems are going to get their asses kicked no matter what happens. Schröder's weeks as Chancellor are numbered. The French press is in a monumental snit. The Socialist organ, Libération, kicked off with the headline "Bush and his eight mercenaries". Boy, they're mad. Good. It pleases me to see frustrated left-wing Frenchmen. Libé called the eight states "vassals" and said, "The leaders in Washington dream of torpedoing the emergence of a powerful Europe that could contest its leadership." Yeah, my ass they do. Libé is so arrogant and self-absorbed that it thinks the Americans are actually worried about the EU becoming a rival.

They did a survey in the 15 EU countries; to the question, "Do you think your country should be involved in a military attack on Iraq if the UN decides in favor of one?" The percentage of respondents saying yes were: UK 79%, Denmark 71%, Holland 68%, France 67%, Italy 66%, Luxembourg 63%, Belgium 56%, Portugal 56%, Ireland 51%, Germany 45%, Spain 45%, Sweden 39%, Finland 31%, Greece 25%, Austria 19%, and the EU average was 57%. It seems to me that this is evidence of solid support for an Alliance attack on the part of the peoples of both new Europe and Old Europe: 67% of the people in France answered responsibly, for example. It sounds to me like the French government is out of sync with its voters, but then we knew that anyway, since fewer than 20% of them voted for the current president in the first round of the most recent elections, nearly the same percentage voted for racist reactionary Jean-Marie Le Pen, and about the same percentage voted for a melange of assorted Commies and Trots.

Here in Spain the Socialists are completely lost; they're in well over their heads and have no idea what to do. Socialist leader Zapatero is not taking a clear position; what it sounds like is that he's against the Iraq war unless France decides for it, which they will do after Feb. 5's Security Council Showdown. Mariano Rajoy, a PP heavy hitter, blasted the Socialists for their 1986 campaign against joining NATO and then their about-face and their support for joining up, for forgetting that the Socialist government under Felipe González had participated in Gulf War I, for not listening to Felipe when he said that it's not a good plan to get into a position where you'll have to change sides halfway through, and for not defending Spain's interests through an active consensus foreign policy. He didn't have to mention that the Socialists were responsible for the organization of an anti-ETA death squad under Felipe and that they therefore should perhaps abstain from making moral judgments about others who feel the need to defend themselves in an open, aboveboard way.

The Catalan nationalist party, Convergence and Union, has also come out against the war. Loudmouth Convergence deputy Ignasi Guardans, who is a self-satisfied little prick, accused Foreign Minister Ana Palacio of lying on the floor of Parliament and refused to retract his statement; he later told Miss Palacio, who is pro-alliance, that "You don't support the United States, you support their most reactionary right wing," after blaming the United States for the existence of the Franco dictatorship. This is the sort of behavior that one would expect from the Communists or the Basque wackos but not from a respectable, moderate political party. Convergence party boss Jordi Pujol, who is an old fox and should never be underestimated, needs to call Mr. Guardans on the carpet and remind him that bugs don't fly into closed mouths. Meanwhile, Convergence spokesman Felip Puig compared Aznar to Le Pen. People who say ridiculous things like that often regret it later. I suspect that Mr. Aznar will personally assure Mr. Puig's regrettance at some future date.

Spain is preparing for war. A hospital is being set up at the Rota naval base for wounded alliance soldiers. Rota is also preparing to handle a large number of Allied soldiers as an intermediate transit point. The Spanish fleet will patrol in the Med, the Atlantic, and the Indian Ocean as part of an Allied fleet, and Spanish AWACS planes will be used. There will also be Spanish participation in the post-war peacekeeping force.

Posted 18:42 by John

Well, the Iraq situation is still rather on the back burner; the big news is the huge winter storm that has hit all of northern Spain, including interior Catalonia. Here in Barcelona it's about 7ºC and windy, a rather chill winter's day, but temperatures have fallen to -15ºC in the Pyrenees with snowfalls of up to 2 1/2 meters and winds as high as 200 km/h. The north winds (in northern Catalonia it comes straight out of the north and is called the tramuntana; in southern Catalonia it comes out of the northwest and is called the mistral) are one of the more unpleasant aspects of the Catalan winter, since they blow hard every day and never let up. Waves were four meters high at Roses, when the normal Mediterranean waves are like a foot high. The winds were so high that there was a major forest fire up in Santa Cristina that burned up 300 hectares--a soccer field is about half a hectare. 400 people had to be evacuated. The Valle de Arán up in the Pyrenees (nice place, worth a visit) is cut off since both the Vielha tunnel and the Bonaigua mountain pass are blocked off by the snow and the only way in and out is through France. Most of the high-altitude ski resorts have had to close down, both because the storm makes it impossible to ski and because no one could get there to ski anyway. (People in Barcelona love skiing. Good slopes are three hours or so by car from BCN. Some people go every weekend.)

I remember once taking a geography class that dealt partially with people's perceptions of geography. I had a good idea for a term paper, that of looking at the radio networks of various sports teams to see how far a city's influence extended. For example, if you look at a map of Missouri, the St. Louis Cardinals dominate most of the state; the Kansas City Royals have followers who care enough to listen to the games on radio only in the northwestern quarter of Missouri, the area that's more influenced by KC than by St. Louis. I just got the idea of looking at the cities listed in La Vanguardia's international weather report; the hypothesis is that the places listed are those of most importance for the Barcelonese. I've classified the cities:

European capitals: Andorra la Vella, Amsterdam, Athens, Berlin, Brussels, Budapest, Copenhagen, Dublin, Stockholm, Helsinki, Lisbon, London, Moscow, Oslo, Paris, Prague, Rome, Warsaw, Vienna.
European non-capitals: France: Chamonix, Lyon, Montpellier, Nice, Perpignan. Germany: Frankfurt, Munich. Switzerland: Geneva, Zurich. Italy: Milan, Naples, Turin.
North American cities: Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, Miami, Montreal, New York, San Francisco, Toronto, Washington.
Latin American cities: Buenos Aires, Caracas, Havana, Managua, Mexico City, Montevideo, Rio de Janeiro, Santo Domingo, Sao Paulo.
Middle East / North Africa: Cairo, Istanbul, Rabat, Tunis.
Rest of world: Hong Kong, Manila, Nairobi, New Delhi, Tokyo.

It looks to me, then, as the Barcelona vision of the relative importance of places is, first, Catalonia, with weather reports for about 30 cities listed; then the rest of Spain, with about 50 cities on the list; then Europe, and especially France, Italy, Switzerland, and Germany--the Balkans are not significant in Barcelona's eyes, with no city listed between Budapest and Athens, and neither is the former Soviet Union except for Moscow; then North America and Latin America--Latin America, with nine cities listed, is clearly important in the Barcelona view of the world, more so than it is to most people in most other European countries; then North Africa, close to Spain, with three cities listed. The rest of the world, Asia, Oceania, and especially sub-Saharan Africa, count little in the Barcelona worldview.